Engineering Services Report › weblink › 0 › edoc › 124077 › EGD...Consulting/Professional Fees reserve account number 100-00-000-00000-2926, to Canadian National Railway

Engineering Services Report

If this information is required in an alternate accessible format, please contact the Accessibility Coordinator at 905-623-3379 ext. 2131.

Report To: General Government Committee

Date of Meeting: February 12, 2018

Report Number: EGD-004-18 Resolution:

File Number: By-law Number:

Report Subject: Bennett Road & Cobbledick Road Grade Level Crossings Train Whistle Cessation Study

Recommendations:

1. That Report EGD-004-18 be received;

EITHER

2. That Council direct staff to undertake Step 2 within the Transport Canada procedurefor the elimination of train whistling at grade crossings, and review the findings of theWSP Group Canada Limited (WSP) report with the rail authority, provided that thereis a willingness to assume the total potential cost of remediation which may beapproximately $430,000;

3. That Council authorize staff to issue a $10,000 purchase order, funded from theConsulting/Professional Fees reserve account number 100-00-000-00000-2926, toCanadian National Railway for their review of the sites and the WSP WhistleCessation Report;

4. That Staff report back to Council on the results of the Step 2 discussions with theRail Authority; and

5. That all interested parties listed in Report EGD-004-18 and any delegations beadvised of Council's decision.

OR

6. That the request for whistle cessation at the Bennett Road and Cobbledick RoadLevel Crossings be formally denied; and

GG-013-18, GG-015-18

Municipality of Clarington Page 2 Report EGD-004-18

7. That all interested parties listed in Report EGD-004-18 and any delegations be advised of Council's decision.


1. Background

As per the direction of Council at the General Government Committee meeting on May 29, 2017, Staff have advanced a study for the cessation of train whistles at the grade level crossings at Bennett Road and Cobbledick Road due to concerns raised by area residents over “nuisance noise” caused by train whistling that occurs near and at these crossings.

1.1 Procedure for the Elimination of Train Whistling

Transport Canada provides a procedure for eliminating train whistling at public grade crossings. The procedure is compliant with the Grade Crossing Standards. The procedure consists of eight steps which are listed below:

1.1.1. Step 1

An interest for whistling cessation exists when a municipality receives a request from a citizen or a community group to stop train whistling at a specific area (one crossing or multiple crossings) along a railway corridor.

1.1.2. Step 2

Municipality consults with Railway Company.

The municipality consults with the railway company that operates the relevant line of railway to assess the feasibility of the whistling cessation request.

1.1.3. Step 3

Municipality issues notifications and public notice.

Report Overview The purpose of this report is to present to Council the assessment, conclusions and recommendations of the Whistle Cessation Study conducted for the Bennett Road and Cobbledick Road grade level crossings and to seek Council direction either in moving forward to Step 2 in the Transport Canada Procedure or in denying the request for whistle cessation.


The municipality notifies all relevant associations or organizations (http://www.tc.gc.ca/eng/railsafety/legislation-380.htm) and issues a public notice of its intention to pass a resolution declaring that it agrees that whistles should not be used at a specific area (crossing or multiple crossings) along a railway corridor.

1.1.4. Step 4

Municipality and railway assess the crossing(s) against the prescribed requirements in the Grade Crossings Regulations and Grade Crossing Standards.

The municipality and the railway company assess whether or not the area (crossing or multiple crossings) meets the whistling cessation requirements specified in section 104 of the Grade Crossings Regulations and Appendix D of the Grade Crossing Standards. This may be done by engaging a professional engineer to determine if the area complies with the conditions in the regulations.

1.1.5. Step 5

Municipality and railway agree that the crossing(s) meets the prescribed requirements of the Grade Crossings Regulations and Standards.

If the municipality and the railway company do not mutually agree that the crossing(s) meets the prescribed requirements, they should try to resolve the conflict.

1.1.6. Step 5A (optional)

Municipality and railway request a final decision from Transport Canada.

If disagreement between the municipality and the railway persists, the supporting documentation should be provided to Transport Canada ([email protected]) for further assessment. Transport Canada’s decision on the issue is final.

1.1.7. Step 6

Municipality passes a resolution declaring that it agrees that whistles should not be used in that area, thereby prohibiting train whistling.

https://www.tc.gc.ca/eng/railsafety/legislation-380.htm

http://www.tc.gc.ca/eng/railsafety/grade-crossings-standards.htm

mailto:[email protected]


Once it is deemed that the provisions of the Grade Crossings Regulations and Standards are satisfied, the municipality must declare, by resolution, that it agrees that train whistles should not be used at the prescribed crossing(s). A copy of the resolution should be sent to the Railway Company and all relevant associations or organizations, including the headquarters of Transport Canada’s Rail Safety Directorate ([email protected]).

1.1.8. Step 7

Railway Company notifies Transport Canada and informs the municipality within 30 days that it has arranged to have whistling ceased at the crossing(s).

Upon receipt of the resolution, the railway company issues its special instructions, as per CROR 14(l)(iv), eliminating the application of CROR 14(l)(i), while providing for CROR 14(f). The railway company notifies the headquarters of Transport Canada’s Rail Safety Directorate ([email protected]) of the effective date of whistling cessation at the crossing(s), and provides a copy of its special instructions.

The railway company notifies the municipality and/or the road authorities in writing of the whistling cessation not later than 30 days after the day whistling is ceased.

1.1.9. Step 8

Municipality and railway share the responsibility for monitoring and maintaining the conditions that support the cessation of train whistling at the crossing(s).

A Transport Canada Railway Safety Inspector may order the reinstatement of whistling at the crossing(s) should the responsible authorities fail to maintain the area in a manner that meets the prescribed requirements of the Grade Crossings Regulations and section 23.1 of the Railway Safety Act.

1.1.10. Council Approvals

It should be noted that prior to moving through from Step 1 to Step 2 and from Step 2 to Step 3, Municipal Council are required to make the decision to move forward with the process or not as there are financial implications in doing so.




1.2 Next Steps in the Transport Canada Procedure

In keeping with Transport Canada’s procedure and in preparation for Step 2, WSP Group Canada Limited (WSP) was retained by the Municipality of Clarington in October, 2017 to complete the study. The scope of the study was to collect and provide related information to determine if train whistling could be eliminated at two active grade level crossings on the Canadian National Railway (CN) Kingston Subdivision within the Municipality in accordance with Transport Canada’s Grade Crossings Regulations (GCR) and Grade Crossings Standards (GCS).

WSP completed the study in January, 2018 and provided staff with a report detailing regulatory requirements, whistle cessation procedures, assessment of existing conditions at the crossings, recommendations for improvements at the crossings to meet the requirements of the GCR and GCS, and a high level, conceptual cost estimation for implementation of the required improvements.

The next step, Step 2 in the Transport Canada guidelines, would be to review the study findings and recommendations with the rail authority and obtain their input on the feasibility of the whistle cessation request.

2. Study Findings

2.1 Study Findings

An assessment was completed for both grade level crossings in accordance with Transport Canada’s GCR for compliance with the requirements to enable exemption from the regulatory train whistling requirements.

Both the Bennett Road and Cobbledick Road crossings complied with regulatory requirements pertaining to:

• The location of the crossing within the rail corridor • The active warning system • No observed evidence of unauthorized access/trespass into the rail corridor • No adjacent crossings within a prescribed 400m distance

3. Financial Implications Conceptual Cost Estimate

WSP has prepared a conceptual cost estimate based on the scope of the suggested actions for the remediation of the deficiencies observed at each crossing to ensure


compliance with Transport Canada’s GCR & GCS, should the Municipality wish to pursue whistle cessation.

A detailed list of the estimated cost of each item can be found in Tables 3 & 4 (Bennett Road) and Tables 6 & 7 (Cobbledick Road), Attachment 1.

Considering the works that WSP have recommended, staff have estimated a cost of approximately $55,000 for the Bennett Road level crossing, approximately $205,000, for the Cobbledick Road level crossing and possibly $170,000 for the potential cost of fencing, for a total cost of approximately $430,000. The details of this estimate can be found in Attachment 2.

It should be noted that several improvements at the Bennett Road crossing will be undertaken by Lakebreeze East Village Ltd. as a condition of the Lakebreeze subdivision currently being constructed west of Bennett Road. At the conclusion of works for the subdivision, the Bennett Road grade crossing will need to be re-assessed for compliance to the GCR and GCS and further remediation measures may be warranted. It is estimated that the subdivision related works of Bennett Road, will reduce the whistle cessation remediation works by roughly $123,900, including track crossing surfacing which has been factored into the $55,000 cost estimate.

It should be noted that in other municipalities where whistle cessation has been considered the fencing of the railway corridor has been raised as a requirement to increase safety and to mitigate trespass concerns. Although trespass has not been identified as an issue as part of this initial review it may become a concern as development of the area progresses. Currently a subdivision is under construction west of Bennett Road that would bring almost 4,000 new residents to the area. East of Bennett Road, north of the tracks a new Secondary Plan is being undertaken that would potentially see just over 1000 new residents. As these developments proceed trespass may become an issue and fencing installation may be required to maintain whistle cessation at these two crossings. The subdivision west of Bennett Road has fencing along the south side of the rail corridor as a requirement but trespass concerns may arise outside the subdivision limits. Future fencing requirements may add to the costs of maintaining whistle cessation. As potential for further development in the area around the Cobbledick Road level crossing is very low it is not anticipated that trespass issues will arise.


With the pending future development in the area of the Bennett Road level crossing and considering the subdivision at the southwest quadrant of the crossing includes fencing there may be a potential for the requirement for fencing at the other 3 quadrants of the crossing with an estimated cost of roughly $170,000. Installation of the fencing would require approval of the landowners adjacent to the rail corridor, one of them is Clarington, as typically the rail authority does not permit the construction of fencing within the corridor.

The Canadian National Railway (CNR) has stated that it will require a purchase order in the amount of $10,000 to undertake a review of the whistle cessation request and the supporting report that Clarington retained WSP to complete. The $10,000 is an upset amount and CNR would bill for actual staff and consultant time spent on the review. Funding for this could be provided from the Consulting/Professional Fees reserve, account number 100-00-000-00000-2926.

3.2 Maintenance

Further to the immediate improvements required, the Municipality and the rail authority would be required to maintain the grade level crossings to ensure continued compliance with the GCR and GCS. If a crossing falls below compliance, the rail authority may choose to reintroduce whistling at their discretion.

3.3 Liability

The Municipality will be required to enter into a liability agreement with the railway and obtain additional liability insurance to protect the Municipality and the railway against third party claims for bodily injury and property damage arising out of or resulting from or connected with the issuance of an order to stop whistling at affected crossings. It is estimated that the cost of additional insurance premiums required with the implementation of whistle cessation would be approximately $500 per level crossing.

4. Available Options Both crossings are eligible for the implementation of whistle cessation, however, the assessment of the crossings revealed several deficiencies that would need to be remediated to ensure compliance with Transport Canada’s GCR and GCS. These deficiencies include improvements to the grade level crossing surface and road approaches, signage, pavement markings and active warning system and are expected to cost approximately $430,000 if fencing costs are also factored in. A detailed list of the noted deficiencies and suggested immediate and future actions for remediation can


be found in Tables 3 & 4 (Bennett Road) and Tables 6 & 7 (Cobbledick Road), of Attachment 1 to Report EGD-004-18. The detailed cost estimate including rail authority fees, design, administration and contingencies is provided as Attachment 2 to Report EGD-004-18.

Council can choose to proceed in moving to Step 2 by authorizing staff to issue a $10,000 purchase order, funded from the Consulting/Professional Fees reserve account number 100-00-00000-2926, to the Canadian National Railway for their review of the sites and the Whistle Cessation Report. In doing so Council will be indicating a willingness to accept the total costs for the necessary improvement works which may be approximately $430,000. These costs will be included in a future budget.

OR

Council denies the request for whistle cessation at the Bennett Road & Cobbledick Road Level Crossings.

5. Concurrence This report has been reviewed by the Director of Finance/Treasurer who concurs with the recommendations.

6. Conclusion The whistle cessation study conducted concludes, based on WSP’s review, that whistle cessation is possible at both the Bennett Road, and Cobbledick Road, grade level crossings subject to the implementation of recommended actions for safety improvements to ensure compliance with Transport Canada’s GCR and GCS if Council is willing to assume the costs.

Staff are of the opinion that cessation of whistling reduces the level of safety at the grade level crossings and increases potential risk and liability to the Municipality. Future intensive development of the surrounding areas will bring significant increases to traffic of all varieties at the crossings. The Municipality and rail authority will need to ensure strict maintenance of the crossings to limit risk and liability.

With the findings of the whistle cessation report it would be feasible to move to Step 2 of Transport Canada’s guidelines for whistle cessation if Council is willing to accept that there may be a financial impact of approximately $430,000 with respect to implementation that would require funding. The preliminary cost estimate would be refined through Step 2 of the process. Should the project move beyond Step 2, the future capital requirements would be referred for consideration to a future budget as appropriate based on timing.


7. Strategic Plan Application Not applicable.

Submitted by: Reviewed by: Anthony Cannella, Andrew C. Allison, B. Comm, LL.B Director of Engineering Services CAO

Staff Contact: Ron Albright, Assistant Director, Engineering Services, (905) 623-3379, Ext. 2305 or [email protected]

ASC/ra/rb/jb

Attachments:

Attachment 1 – Train Whistle Cessation Study, CN Rail Crossing on Bennett Road and Cobbledick Road in Clarington, ON - WSP

Attachment 2 – Detailed Cost Estimate

List of interested parties to be notified of Council's decision is on file in the Engineering Services Department.

Wilmot Creek Homeowners Association Lakebreeze East Village Ltd. (Kaitlin)

THE CORPORATION OF THE

MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON –

TRAIN WHISTLE CESSATION STUDY

CN RAIL CROSSING ON BENNETT ROAD AND COBBLEDICK

ROAD IN CLARINGTON, ONTARIO

FEBRUARY 05, 2018

Attachment 1 to Report EGD-004-18

The Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington – Train Whistle Cessation Study CN Rail Crossings on Bennett Road and Cobbledick Road in Clarington, Ontario WSP Canada Group Limited | February 2018 i

Executive Summary

WSP Group Limited (WSP) was retained by the Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington

(the Municipality) to undertake a detailed safety assessment for two at grade crossings located

within the Municipality and to eliminate whistle blowing at these crossing locations. The railway

tracks in the study area operate under the authority of the Canadian National Railway (CN)

Kingston Subdivision and include two at grade crossing locations summarised in the following

table:

Crossing Municipality Road Authority Comments

Bennett Road (Mile 289.08, CN Kingston Subdivision)

Clarington, Ontario

The Corporation of the Municipality of

Clarington 2 track crossing

Cobbledick Road (Mile 287.26, CN Kingston Subdivision)

Clarington, Ontario

The Corporation of the Municipality of

Clarington 3 track crossing

As per Transport Canada’s (TC) Grade Crossing Standards (GCS), the elimination of train

whistling must be applied for and a separate application is necessary for the elimination of

engine bell ringing.

The purpose of this Study is to collect and provide the necessary information and

recommendations to potentially enable exemption from the regulatory train whistling

requirements in the vicinity of public at-grade crossings on the Kingston Subdivision. Crossings

were assessed in accordance with TC’s Grade Crossing Regulations (GCR) and GCS. In order

for a crossing to be allowed an exemption from whistling, the requirements specified in section

104 of the Grade Crossings Regulations and Appendix D of the GCS must be met.

Train whistling requirements are controlled through the following standards, rules, guidelines:

• Canadian Rail Operating Rules (CROR). Rule 14(L)(i)

• Procedure & Conditions For Eliminating Whistling At Public Crossings - Guideline No. 1

• Canadian Road/Railway Grade Crossing Detailed Safety Assessment Field Guide (TP

14372)

• Grade Crossing Standards (GCS)

• Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices for Canada

• TAC Geometric Design Guide for Canadian Roads

The Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington – Train Whistle Cessation Study CN Rail Crossings on Bennett Road and Cobbledick Road in Clarington, Ontario

ii WSP Canada Group Limited | February 2018

Engine whistle (cycle of long, long, short, long) is required by Canadian Rail Operating Rules

(CROR) under Rule 14(I) with the signal of “2 long, 1 short, 1 long” as follows:

(i) At public crossings at-grade:

Trains exceeding 44mph must sound whistle signal ¼ miles before the crossing, to be

prolonged or repeated, until the crossing is fully occupied.

Note: A whistle post will be located ¼ mile before each public crossing where required.

Movements operating at 44 mph or less must sound whistle signal to provide 20

seconds warning before entering the crossing and continuing to sound whistle signal

until crossing is fully occupied.

EXCEPTION: Engine whistle signal is not required when manual protection is provided,

or shoving equipment other than a snow plow over a crossing protected by automatic

warning devices.

(ii) At other whistle posts indicated in special instructions.

(iii) At frequent intervals when view is restricted by weather, curvature or other conditions.

(iv) Special instructions will govern when such signal is prohibited in whole or in part.

(v) In addition an engine bell must be rung in accordance with the Canadian Rail Operating

Rules (CROR) under Rule 13(a):

(vi) One-quarter of a mile from every public crossing at-grade (except within limits, as may

be prescribed in special instructions) until the crossing is fully occupied by the engine of

cars. When engine whistle signal 14(I) is sounded, the engine bell need not be rung.

Pursuant to the GCR the crossings were assessed for compliance with the requirements

specified within section 104 to enable exemption from the regulatory train whistling

requirements. An overview of the assessment as per section 104 of the GCR is provided in the

table below.

The Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington – Train Whistle Cessation Study CN Rail Crossings on Bennett Road and Cobbledick Road in Clarington, Ontario WSP Canada Group Limited | February 2018 iii

Grade Crossing Regulations Section 104:

For the purposes of section 23.1 of the Railway Safety Act, the following requirements are presecribed:

Crossing Compliance with Prescribed Requirements to Enable Whistle Exemption

Bennett Road Mile 289.08 CN

Kingston Subdivision

Cobbledick Road Mile 287.26 CN

Kingston Subdivision

a) the area must be located: i) within a railway right-of-way, on

each side of a public grade crossing, and within 0.4km from the outer edge of the crossing surface, as shown in Figure D-1 of the Grade Crossing Standards;

� �

a) the area must be located: ii) within the road approach; � �

b) the area must have a public grade crossing that has the applicable protection referred to in sections 105 to 107;

TBD* TBD*

c) the area must not have repeated incidents of unauthorized access to the line of railway; and

� �

d) the area must not require whistling for a grade crossing located outside the area � �

*Subject to review and inclusion dependent on information to be provided from CN. Additional

information requested to assess both crossings as per GCR Section 104 b) include:

• Actual approach warning time,

• Gate arm delay time

• Gate length

• Gate height above crown of the road

• Distance between light units on the gate arm

The execution of a Crossing Safety Assessment is a proactive strategy to aid in determining

existing conditions and safety measures in place at a railway crossing for all crossing users.

Train whistling is a crucial safety measure that provides motorists, cyclists and pedestrians with

advance warning of an approaching train. Whistle cessation is an option that is recommended

for implementation once recommended actions for safety improvements at the crossings have

been completed. Based on the study completed on both crossings located at Bennett Road and

Cobbledick Road, the two crossings are eligible for whistle cessation as per Appendix D subject

to implementation of recommended actions for safety improvements.

Further assessment pursuant to GCR for compliance with the requirements specified within

section 104, notably section 104 b), to enable exemption from the regulatory train whistling

requirements is to be determined and subject to this assessment once additional information

has been provided from CN.


iv WSP Canada Group Limited | February 2018

It should be noted that cessation of whistling reduces the road safety at the railway crossings

and increases potential liability and risk to the Municipality. Future development and future

traffic impacts south of the crossings at Bennett Road and Cobbledick Road were not analyzed

in the study. However, it is expected that the study area may observe an increase of vehicular,

pedestrian and recreational traffic due to the increase of residential developments which will

require the safety at these two crossings to be fully maintained. Further risk assessments are

recommended to be completed once the future development has been constructed.

It is recommended that the Municipality consider the grade separation of Bennett Road and

Cobbledick Road as an option for whistle cessation as it will eliminate the increased potential of

safety hazards brought by the expected increase of pedestrian, vehicular and railway traffic that

may possibly be brought to the area by the future subdivision developments. Such hazards

include but are not limited to unauthorized access to the railway right of way and collisions at

the railway grade crossings.

The Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington – Train Whistle Cessation Study CN Rail Crossings on Bennett Road and Cobbledick Road in Clarington, Ontario WSP Canada Group Limited | February 2018 v

TABLE OF CONTENTS

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ................................................................................................. I

1.0 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................. 1

1.1 Regulatory Requirements ....................................................................... 1

1.1.1 Grade Crossing Regulations – Sections 104 - 107 ................................... 1

1.1.2 Grade Crossing Standards – Table D-1 .................................................... 3

2.0 WHISTLING CESSATION PROCEDURES ......................................................... 4

3.0 METHODOLOGY ................................................................................................. 6

4.0 FINDINGS ............................................................................................................ 7

4.1 Whistle Cessation Regulatory Requirements ....................................... 7

4.1.1 Bennett Road – Mile 289.08 CN Kingston Subdivision ............................. 7

4.1.2 Cobbledick Road – Mile 287.26 CN Kingston Subdivision ...................... 10

4.2 Field Investigations ............................................................................... 12

4.3 Bennett Road (Mile 289.08, CN Kingston Subdivision) ...................... 13

4.4 Cobbledick Road (Mile 287.26, CN Kingston Subdivision) ................ 28

4.5 Cost Estimate Summary ........................................................................ 38

5.0 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS ..................................................................... 39

LIST OF TABLES

Page

Table 1: Table D-1 of GCS: Requirements for Warning Systems at Public Grade Crossings within an

Area without Whistling ................................................................................................................. 3

Table 2: Bennett Road (Mile 289.08) – General Information .................................................... 14

Table 3: Bennett Road (Mile 289.08) – Observations and Recommended Actions – Immediate

Actions ........................................................................................................................................ 23

Table 4: Bennett Road (Mile 289.08) – Observations and Recommended Actions – Future Actions

.................................................................................................................................................... 27


vi WSP Canada Group Limited | February 2018

Table 5: Cobbledick Road (Mile 287.26) – General Information ............................................... 29

Table 6: Cobbledick Road (Mile 287.26) – Observations and Recommended Actions – Immediate

Actions ........................................................................................................................................ 35

Table 7: Cobbledick Road (Mile 287.26) – Observations and Recommended Actions –Future Actions

.................................................................................................................................................... 37

Table 8: Cost Estimate Summary – Immediate Actions ............................................................ 38

Table 9: Cost Estimate Summary – Future Actions .................................................................. 38

APPENDICES

APPENDIX A – Bennett Road (Mile 289.08) Detailed Safety Assessment Field Guide

APPENDIX B – Cobbledick Road (Mile 287.26) Detailed Safety Assessment Field Guide

The Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington – Train Whistle Cessation Study CN Rail Crossings on Bennett Road and Cobbledick Road in Clarington, Ontario WSP Canada Group Limited | February 2018 1

1.0 INTRODUCTION

WSP Canada Group Limited (WSP) was retained by the Corporation of the Municipality of

Clarington (the Municipality) to collect and provide related information and recommendations

necessary to determine if train whistling can be eliminated at two active grade crossings on the

Canadian National Railway (CN) Kingston Subdivision within the Municipality of Clarington. The

two crossings studied are:

• Bennett Road located at Mile 289.08, CN Kingston Subdivision; and

• Cobbledick Road located at Mile 287.26, CN Kingston Subdivision; and

Both of the crossings were assessed in accordance with Transport Canada’s (TC) Grade

Crossing Regulations (GCR) and Grade Crossing Standards (GCS). In order for a crossing to

be considered for an exemption from whistling, the requirements in section 104 of the GCR and

Appendix D of the GCS must be met.

1.1 Regulatory Requirements

Whistle cessation may only be considered if the crossings are compliant with section 104 of the

GCR and Appendix D of the GCS. Relevant sections of the GCR and GCS are listed below:

1.1.1 Grade Crossing Regulations – Sections 104 - 107

§104. For the purposes of section 23.1 of the Railway Safety Act, the following

requirements are prescribed:

(a) the area must be located

(i) within a railway right-of-way, on each side of a public grade crossing,

and within 0.4 km from the outer edge of the crossing surface, as

shown in Figure D-1 of the Grade Crossings Standards, and

(ii) within the road approach;

(b) the area must have a public grade crossing that has the applicable protection

referred to in sections 105 to 107;

(c) the area must not have repeated incidents of unauthorized access to the line

of railway; and

(d) the area must not require whistling for a grade crossing located outside the

area.

§105. (1) A public grade crossing set out in column A of Table D-1 of the Grade Crossings

Standards and located in an area referred to in section 104 must be equipped with

the warning system set out in Table D-1 of the those Standards that corresponds to

the number of tracks and the railway design speed set out in that Table, and the

warning system must meet the applicable standards set out in articles 12 to 16 of

those Standards.


2 WSP Canada Group Limited | February 2018

(2) If a gate is not indicated as being required in Table D-1 of the Grade Crossings

Standards, it is nonetheless required if the grade crossing corresponds to the

applicable specifications set out in article 9.2 of those Standards.

§106. (1) A public grade crossing set out in column B of Table D-1 of the Grade Crossings

Standards and located in an area referred to in section 104 must be equipped with

the warning system that corresponds to the number of tracks and the railway design

speed set out in that Table, and the warning system must meet the applicable

standards set out in articles 12 to 16 of those Standards.

(2) If a gate is not indicated as being required in Table D-1 of the Grade Crossings

Standards, it is nonetheless required if the grade crossing corresponds to the

applicable specifications set out in article 9.6 of those Standards.

(3) If a warning system without a gate is indicated as being required in Table D-1 of

the Grade Crossings Standards, guide fencing must be installed to deter persons

from crossing the line of railway other than at the grade crossing.

(4) If a warning system is not indicated as being required in column 5 of Table D-1 of

the Grade Crossings Standards, guide fencing must be installed, as well as a barrier

that is intended to slow a person’s approach to the grade crossing and to encourage

a person to look both ways before crossing the grade crossing.

§107. Despite sections 105 and 106, if railway equipment must stop before proceeding

across a public grade crossing that is located in an area referred to in section 104

and that is used by motor vehicles,

(a) a warning system with flashing lights and bells must be installed at the grade

crossing and must meet the applicable standards set out in articles 12 to 16

of the Grade Crossings Standards; or

(b) the railway company must manually protect the grade crossing.


1.1.2 Grade Crossing Standards – Table D-1

Column A Column B

Railway Design

Speed

Grade Crossings for Vehicle Use

Grade Crossings for Sidewalks,

Paths, or Trails with the centreline

no closer than 3.6m (12 ft) to a

warning signal for vehicles

No. of Tracks No. of Tracks

1 2 or more 1 2 or more

Column 1 Column 2 Column 3 Column 4 Column 5

1 – 25 km/h

(15 mph) FLB FLB

No warning

system

requirement

No warning

system

requirement

25 – 81 km/h

(16 -50 mph) FLB FLB & G FLB FLB & G

Over 81 km/h

(50 mph) FLB & G FLB & G FLB & G FLB & G

Legend

FLB is a warning system consisting of flashing lights and a bell.

FLB & G is a warning system consisting of flashing lights, a bell and gates.

Table 1: Table D-1 of GCS: Requirements for Warning Systems at Public Grade

Crossings within an Area without Whistling

The following outlines suggested conditions for crossings where relief from whistling is being

sought:

• Crossing warning systems should be as indicated on Table D-1 of the GCS and

compliant with articles 12 to 16 of the GCS.

• Railway right-of-way must not have evidence of repeated unauthorized access

(trespassing) within 400m on either side of the crossing.

• Generally, whistling restrictions should be on a 24 hour basis. Under exceptional

circumstances, and following consultation with Transport Canada, relief from whistling

may be permitted between the hours of 2200 and 0700, local time. However the

protection requirements should be the same as those required for a 24 hour whistling

relief.

• Rules, respecting the sounding of locomotive bells, should still apply.

• Where a crossing has experienced two or more accidents in the past five years, even if

the requirements laid out in Table D-1 are met, the responsible authorities should

undertake a thorough safety review.



2.0 WHISTLING CESSATION PROCEDURES

Transport Canada provides a procedure for eliminating train whistling at public grade crossings

on their website (https://www.tc.gc.ca/eng/railsafety/railsafety-976.html). The procedure is

compliant with the Grade Crossing Standards and supersedes the previous Procedure &

Conditions for Eliminating Whistling at Public Crossings (Guideline No. 1). The procedure

consists of eight steps which are listed below:

1. Interest for whistling cessation is expressed.

An interest for whistling cessation exists when a municipality receives a request from a

citizen or a community group to stop train whistling at a specific area (one crossing or

multiple crossings) along a railway corridor.

2. Municipality consults with Railway Company.

The municipality consults with the railway company that operates the relevant line of

railway to assess the feasibility of the whistling cessation request.

3. Municipality issues notifications and public notice.

The municipality notifies all relevant associations or organizations

(http://www.tc.gc.ca/eng/railsafety/legislation-380.htm) and issues a public notice of its

intention to pass a resolution declaring that it agrees that whistles should not be used at

a specific area (crossing or multiple crossings) along a railway corridor.

4. Municipality and railway assess the crossing(s) against the prescribed

requirements in the Grade Crossings Regulations and Grade Crossing Standards.

The municipality and the railway company assess whether or not the area (crossing or

multiple crossings) meets the whistling cessation requirements specified in section 104

of the Grade Crossings Regulations and Appendix D of the Grade Crossing Standards.

This may be done by engaging a professional engineer to determine if the area complies

with the conditions in the regulations.

5. Municipality and railway agree that the crossing(s) meets the prescribed

requirements of the Grade Crossings Regulations and Standards.

If the municipality and the railway company do not mutually agree that the crossing(s)

meets the prescribed requirements, they should try to resolve the conflict.

5A. (Optional) Municipality and railway request a final decision from Transport

Canada.


If disagreement between the municipality and the railway persists, the supporting

documentation should be provided to Transport Canada ([email protected]) for further

assessment. Transport Canada’s decision on the issue is final.

6. Municipality passes a resolution declaring that it agrees that whistles should not

be used in that area, thereby prohibiting train whistling.

Once it is deemed that the provisions of the Grade Crossings Regulations and

Standards are satisfied, the municipality must declare, by resolution, that it agrees that

train whistles should not be used at the prescribed crossing(s). A copy of the resolution

should be sent to the railway company and all relevant associations or organizations,

including the head quarters of Transport Canada’s Rail Safety Directorate

([email protected]).

7. Railway Company notifies Transport Canada and informs the municipality within

30 days that it has arranged to have whistling ceased at the crossing(s).

Upon receipt of the resolution, the railway company issues its special instructions, as per

CROR 14(l)(iv), eliminating the application of CROR 14(l)(i), while providing for

CROR 14(f). The railway company notifies the headquarters of Transport Canada’s Rail

Safety Directorate ([email protected]) of the effective date of whistling cessation at the

crossing(s), and provides a copy of its special instructions.

The railway company notifies the municipality and/or the road authorities in writing of the

whistling cessation not later than 30 days after the day whistling is ceased.

8. Municipality and railway share the responsibility for monitoring and maintaining

the conditions that support the cessation of train whistling at the crossing(s).

A Transport Canada Railway Safety Inspector may order the reinstatement of whistling

at the crossing(s) should the responsible authorities fail to maintain the area in a manner

that meets the prescribed requirements of the Grade Crossings Regulations and section

23.1 of the Railway Safety Act.



3.0 METHODOLOGY

In order to assist with the application process required by TC to facilitate whistle cessation at the

subject crossings, WSP has implemented the following work plan:

1. Coordinate and consult with the Municipality and CN to facilitate a safe site visit and

acquisition of track and road alignments, crossing dimensions, type of crossing

protection, road signs and pavement markings, sight-lines, and other pertinent

information for subsequent evaluation;

2. Obtain available crash data at the crossings from the Transportation Safety Board

(available online);

3. Obtain information about roadway and railway operations over the crossings from the

Municipality and CN respectively (received September 22 2017);

4. Conduct a field investigation/audit of the crossing on November 14, 2017 and January

18 2018 which includes:

• Visually examining the railway crossing and road approaches;

• Assessing railway crossing sight lines and queuing;

• Identifying and recording any indication of trespassing in the areas;

• Identifying and recording the type, condition, length and height of any existing

fencing in the areas;

• Identifying the location railway bridges/trestles and other structures which may be

relevant;

• Identifying the location of private or other crossings within 400m (quarter mile) each

side;

Data on the crossing was collected in accordance with TC’s Canadian Road/Railway

Grade Crossing Detailed Safety Assessment Field Guide (April 2005). The template has

been updated to reflect the new Grade Crossing Standards (November 2014).

5. Prepared a report detailing the findings of the field investigation/audit, identifying the

mitigation measures necessary to facilitate the safe implementation of anti-whistling, and

providing associated cost estimates.


4.0 FINDINGS

4.1 Whistle Cessation Regulatory Requirements

An assessment of both crossings was completed, pursuant to GCR for compliance with the

requirements specified within section 104, to enable exemption from the regulatory train

whistling requirements. A description of this assessment and the requirements specified within

section 104 at each crossing is provided below.

4.1.1 Bennett Road – Mile 289.08 CN Kingston Subdivision

Section 104(a)

This section outlines the area within which whistle cessation would be implemented. It includes 400m of the rail corridor on either side of the crossing, as well as through the crossing itself. The railway crossing at Bennett Road is located within a railway right-of way as shown in Figure D-1 of the GCS, as per Figure 1 below, and is within the road approach.

Figure 1 - Figure D-1 of GCS: Prescribed area for whistling cessation

Section 104(b)

This section outlines the required crossing protection for the implementation of whistle cessation. Since Bennett Road is a public grade crossing classified for vehicle use and does not operate with a “stop and proceed procedure”, Section 105 dictates the required protections. Section 105 indicates that crossings must meet the requirements of Table D-1 in the GCS as per Table 1 in Section 1.1.2 above.

The grade crossing at Bennett Road has two tracks and railway speed over 81km/h (50mph). As per Table D-1, the warning system at Bennett Road must consist of flashing lights, a bell and gates. The existing warning system at Bennett Road meets these requirements.



Section 105 also requires that the warning system meet the applicable standards set out in Articles 12 to 16 of the Grade Crossing Standards.

Assessment of Bennett Road for compliance to GCR Section 105 requires additional information from CN to be completed. Additional information has been requested to assess both crossings as per GCR Section 104 b) and includes:



• Gate length



Section 104(c)

This section requires that the Railway Company and Road Authority ensure that there are no

repeated instances of unauthorized access to the rail corridor within the area proposed for

whistle cessation. This would include residents walking along the rail corridor or crossing the

railway at locations other than grade crossings.

Should evidence of unauthorized access be found, mitigation measures may include fencing

along the length of the rail corridor, as well as enforcement and community education programs

to address trespassing issues.

With future development per the proposed subdivision works south of the crossing at Bennett

Road, a significant increase to the population within the area may be expected. Further risk

assessments are recommended to be carried for this crossing and the development project area

during and after construction to assess potential trespassing risks through the advancement of

the subdivision. Field observations and suggested actions for the installation of fencing on each

quadrant of the crossing location has been discussed in Section 4.3.

During the site visit on November 14 2017 and January 18 2018, WSP did not observe any

evidence of trespassing within 400m on either side of the grade crossing. Photos 1 and 2 below

show a visual of both sides rail corridor at Bennett Road.

Section 104(d)

This section indicates that whistle cessation cannot be implemented within an area if that area

requires whistling due to an adjacent grade crossing.

There are no grade crossings within 400m (quarter mile) on either side of the grade crossing at

Bennett Road.


Photo 1 – Bennett Road crossing, rail corridor looking east.

Photo 2 – Bennett Road crossing, rail corridor looking west.



4.1.2 Cobbledick Road – Mile 287.26 CN Kingston Subdivision

Section 104(a)

This section outlines the area within which whistle cessation would be implemented. It includes

400m of the rail corridor on either side of the crossing, as well as through the crossing itself. The

railway crossing at Cobbledick Road is located within a railway right-of way as shown in Figure

D-1 of the GCS, as per Figure 1 in Section 4.1.1 above, and is within the road approach.

Section 104(b)

This section outlines the required crossing protection for the implementation of whistle

cessation. Since Cobbledick Road is a public grade crossing classified for vehicle use and does

not operate with a “stop and proceed procedure”, Section 105 dictates the required protections.

Section 105 indicates that crossings must meet the requirements of Table D-1 in the GCS as

per Table 1 in Section 1.1.2 above.

The grade crossing at Cobbledick Road has three tracks and railway speed over 81km/h

(50mph). As per Table D-1, the warning system at Cobbledick Road must consist of flashing

lights, a bell and gates. The existing warning system at Cobbledick Road meets these

requirements.

Section 105 also requires that the warning system meet the applicable standards set out in

Articles 12 to 16 of the Grade Crossing Standards.

Assessment of Cobbledick Road for compliance to GCR Section 105 requires additional

information from CN to be completed. Additional information has been requested to assess both

crossings as per GCR Section 104 b) and includes:



• Gate length



Section 104(c)

This section requires that the Railway Company and Road Authority ensure that there are no

repeated instances of unauthorized access to the rail corridor within the area proposed for

whistle cessation. This would include residents walking along the rail corridor or crossing the

railway at locations other than grade crossings.

Should evidence of unauthorized access be found, mitigation measures may include fencing

along the length of the rail corridor, as well as enforcement and community education programs

to address trespassing issues.

During the site visit on November 21 2017 and January 18 2018, WSP did not observe any

evidence of trespassing within 400m on either side of the grade crossing. Photos 3 and 4 below

show a visual of both sides rail corridor at Cobbledick Road.


Photo 3 – Cobbledick Road crossing, rail corridor looking east.

Photo 4 – Cobbledick Road crossing, rail corridor looking west.



Section 104(d)

This section indicates that whistle cessation cannot be implemented within an area if that area

requires whistling due to an adjacent grade crossing.

There are no grade crossings within 400m (quarter mile) on either side of the grade crossing at

Cobbledick Road.

4.2 Field Investigations

Tables 2 through 5 present the findings of the field investigation/audit; identify the mitigation

measures necessary to facilitate the safe implementation of anti-whistling; and provide

associated cost estimates for each of the crossings. A Detail Safety Assessment Field Guide; as

well as site photos and a scene sketch is presented for each grade crossing in Appendices A –

B.


4.3 Bennett Road (Mile 289.08, CN Kingston Subdivision)

Requirements Existing Conditions

General Information -

Rail

• Railway Company: Canadian National Railway

• Subdivision: Kingston

• Mile: 289.08

• Number of Tracks: 2

• Track Type: Mainline


Road

• Road Authority: The Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington

• Road Name: Bennett Road

• Road Classification: Rural Local Undivided

• Number of Lanes: 2

• Sidewalks, Paths or Trails: No sidewalks on all quadrants.

Waterfront Trail access on the southeast quadrant.

Crossing Type • Active Crossing equipped with Railway Crossing Signs, Flashing

Lights, Bells and Gates (FLBG)

Rail Operations

• Maximum Railway Operating Speed (passenger): 100 mph

• Maximum Railway Operating Speed (freight): 65 mph

• Daily Train Volume (total passenger and freight): 44

Road Operations

• Road Crossing Design Speed: 50 km/h

• Average Annual Daily Traffic (AADT) : 24

• Vehicle types using the crossing: Standard traffic vehicles,

Heavy Single Unit Truck used as the design vehicle.

Sightlines

• Crossing is an active grade crossing with gates and is exempted

from DSSD and DSTOPPED sightline requirements.

• Visibility of the flashing light units and Railway Crossing Signs

from the SSD are clear (Photo 22 and 28).

• Sightline data was collected during the winter and sightlines

must be re-assessed in the spring/summer when foliage is in

place.

Incident History • No reported crashes at the crossing within the past five years

Trespassing

• No evidence of trespassing observed within 400m (1/4 mile)

each side of crossing, on November 21 2017 and January 18

2018.

Nearby Switching

Operations / Yards

• Switch located approximately 600m east of the crossing.

Nearby Railway

Bridges / Trestles

and Other Structures

• None within 400m (1/4mile) on each side of the crossing

Other Nearby

Crossings





Compliance with

Regulatory

Requirements

• GCR §104 (a)

o Proposed location for whistle cessation is within a rail right-

of-way and road approach as defined by the GCR

• GCR §104 (b)

o Crossing is equipped with flashing lights, bells and gates and

satisfies Table D-1 of the GCS

o Compliance with articles 12 to 16 of the GCS to be confirmed

based on receipt of data from CN.

• GCR §104 (c)

o No evidence of trespassing observed within 400m (1/4 mile)

on each side of the grade crossing

• GCR §104 (d)

o Crossing is not located within 400m (1/4 mile) of another

grade crossing which requires whistling

Table 2: Bennett Road (Mile 289.08) – General Information


Recommendations:

The Road Authority (the Municipality) and the Railway Company (CN) may implement whistle

cessation at the crossing located at Bennett Road, Mile 289.08, CN Kingston Subdivision,

Clarington, ON subject to the following suggested remediation listed in Tables 3 and 4.

Recommended Actions for immediate and future actions have been separated as per Tables 3

and 4, respectively. Recommended Actions include an indication of the party responsible for

implementation. Actions are also assigned an implementation category based on the regulatory

requirements and the timelines for their implementation, as specified in the Grade Crossing

Regulations. The implementation categories are as follows:

• Category A: Requirement under the Grade Crossing Regulations; basic requirement

that must be implemented immediately or warning system maintenance issues covered

under Article 17 of the Grade Crossing Standards

• Category B: Requirement under the Grade Crossing Regulations; additional

requirement that must be implemented within seven years after the Grade Crossing

Regulations comes into force (by November 2021)

• Category C: Requirement under the Grade Crossing Regulations; to be addressed

when the affected component is changed (no implementation timeline specified)

• Category D: Other recommendations; not required under the Grade Crossing

Regulations but recommended based on guidelines and best practices

Observations Suggested Actions Client Response

Agree (Y/N)

Comments

1. Grade Crossing Surface

Crossing surface is uneven

due to the condition of the

crossing planks. (Photo 14)

Replace crossing planks or reconstruct crossing surface to ensure a smooth surface. Responsibility: Railway

Company

Implementation: Category B

Cost Estimate (±40%): $50,000.00* *Cost estimate is based on an estimated unit price of $25,000.00 per rehabilitation/reconstruction of one 40ft crossing.




Agree (Y/N)

Comments

Road surface is uneven due

to poorly paved transition

between the road

approaches and the

crossing. This causes

uneven vertical alignments

through the crossing.

Furthermore, there are signs

indicating road approach

deterioration with loose

gravel and pot holes

present. (Photo 14)

Both road approaches to be resurfaced with the method of resurfacing at the discretion of the Road Authority.

The minimum recommended length of road resurfacing is 110m from the railway crossing surface on both road approaches and is based on the SSD required for this roadway’s design speed of 50km/h.

Cost estimate is based on a worst case hot mix resurfacing method with a unit rate of $150,000.00 per lane, per kilometre and has been applied for two lanes per approach at this location.

With future development per the proposed subdivision works south of the crossing, future roadway reconstruction to ensure an even and smooth road surface throughout the SSD on both road approaches.

Responsibility: Road Authority

Implementation: Category B Cost Estimate (±40%): $33,000.00



Agree (Y/N)

Comments

2. Signs and Pavement Markings

Sign post for the Railway

Crossing Ahead Sign (WA-

18) on the south road

approach is not

perpendicular to the road.

(Photo 25)

Realign sign post.

With future development per

the proposed subdivision works

south of the crossing, future

roadway reconstruction to

ensure sign placements

provided on both road

approaches are compliant as

per MUTCDC

recommendations:

- Distance from rail: 50m-

150m

- Lateral placement from

edge of travelled way:

2m-4.5m

- Sign height from edge

of travelled way: 1.5m

(rural areas) or 2.0m

(high pedestrian traffic)


Implementation: Category D

Cost Estimate (±40%): $250.00

Railway Crossing Ahead

Sign on the north and south

road approach do not depict

the number of tracks at the

crossing. (Photo 25)

Replace WA-18 signs with one

that depicts the track

configuration.



Cost Estimate (±40%):

$1,000.00




Agree (Y/N)

Comments

Measurements for the


Sign on the north road

approach do not meet the

MUTCDC recommended

limits:

• Distance from

nearest rail: 166m

(50m -150m)

Sign does not meet MUTCDC

recommended limits. Relocate

sign to meet MUTCDC

recommended limits. Monitor

and ensure sign is visible and

provides adequate warning to

road users.








per MUTCDC

recommendations:


150m



2m-4.5m










Agree (Y/N)

Comments



Sign on the south road


MUTCDC recommended

limits:

• Lateral placement:

1.8m (2.0m – 4.5m)





road users.








per MUTCDC

recommendations:


150m



2m-4.5m











Agree (Y/N)

Comments

Sign post for “REPORT IF

BLOCKED 905-623-

5126PClarington

Emergency Services” Sign

on the south road approach

is leaning. (Photo 24)

Realign sign mast.








per MUTCDC

recommendations:


150m



2m-4.5m










Agree (Y/N)

Comments

No pavement markings are

provided on either road

approach.

Provide pavement markings on

the north and south road

approach as per MUTCDC:

- “X” Pavement markings,

10m beyond the WA-18

sign.

- Stop bars, 2m in

advance of the warning

system.

- Directional dividing lines

within 30m of the

crossing on both road

approaches.

“X” pavement markings should

take into consideration the

recommendation to relocate

the associated WA-18 signs as

per MUTCDC

recommendations.





ensure all pavement markings

are provided on both road

approaches as per MUTCDC

recommendations.




$3,000.00

- “X” Pavement markings:

$1,000.00

- Stop bars: $500.00

- Directional dividing

lines: $1,500.00




Agree (Y/N)

Comments

3. Grade Crossing Warning System

The clearance distance from

the edge of the travelled

way is 1.3m for the south

signal mast which is less

than the GCS limit of

1.875m for roadways

without a curb.

Relocate warning system mast

to meet GCS limits; or

construct curb at least 0.625m

from the warning system

clearance point to protect the

warning system.

Responsibility: Railway

Company; involvement from

Road Authority is required for

curb option.

Implementation: Category C


$2,000.00 (Relocation of

warning system)

$3,000.00 (Construction of

curb)

The distance between the

top of the foundation and

the surrounding ground

surface is 170mm for the

south signal mast. This

exceeds the GCS maximum

limit of 100mm.

Railway Company to ensure

grade crossing warning system

foundations are in compliance

with the GCS.


Company;


Cost Estimate (±40%): TBD*

*Cost estimate cannot be

provided. Warning system

maintenance per GCS

requirements is the

responsibility of the Railway

Company.



Agree (Y/N)

Comments

4. Miscellaneous

Vehicular pathway is present along the SE ROW providing access for Railway Authority personnel. Pathway is easily accessible and unauthorized use of path may influence trespassing.

Ensure Railway Authority access is monitored frequently for unauthorized access. Ensure all access points are controlled for authorized access only.

Responsibility: Railway Company Implementation: Category D Cost Estimate (±40%): TBD* *Cost estimate cannot be provided. Vehicular pathway maintenance is the responsibility of the Railway Company.

Total Cost Estimate (±40%): $90,500.00 (with

relocation of

warning system)

$91,500.00 (with

construction of a

curb)

Table 3: Bennett Road (Mile 289.08) – Observations and Recommended Actions –

Immediate Actions




Agree (Y/N)

Comments

1. Location of the Grade Crossing

“D” distance to the nearest

property access is 5m

(private driveway) and 14m

(private driveway which is

less than the GCS limit of

30m.

Existing warning devices are

visible for vehicles turning

from the above mentioned

property accesses on both

road approaches.

Property access locations are

an existing condition and may

remain. Any future changes to

the location of the crossing or

intersections must apply the

GCS requirements in a manner

that improves overall safety.





apply the GCS requirements as

per GCS Section 11, no part of

the travelled way of an

intersecting road or

entranceway (other than a

railway service road), is closer

than 30m to the nearest rail of

the grade crossing.



Cost Estimate (±40%): TBD



Agree (Y/N)

Comments

2. Road Geometry

Gradient within 8m of the

nearest rail is 3.6% on the

north road approach which

exceeds the GCS limit of

2.0%.

Gradients are an existing

condition and may remain. Any

future changes to the gradient

must apply the GCS

requirements in a manner that

improves overall safety.





ensure gradient on either road

approach are compliant with

the GCS.

If the crossing is designated for

the use of persons with

assistive devices, gradients are

not to exceed 1.0% within 5m

of the crossing.







Agree (Y/N)

Comments

Difference between the road

approach gradient and the

railway cross-slope, 8.2%,

exceeds the GCS limit of

2.0% on the north road

approach classified as Rural

Local Undivided.




must apply the GCS







ensure the difference between

the road approach gradients

and the railway cross-slope on

each road approach are in

compliant with the GCS.






Agree (Y/N)

Comments

3. Miscellaneous


the proposed subdivision

works south of the crossing

at Bennett Road, a

significant increase to the

population within the area

may be expected resulting

in potential trespassing

activities.

Further risk assessments are

recommended to be carried for

this crossing and the

development project area

during and after construction to

assess potential trespassing

risks through the advancement

of the subdivision.

Installation of fencing may be

required to reduce trespassing

onto the railway corridor. If

warranted, fencing is

recommended for 400m along

the railway right of way on both

sides of each rail approach.

Cost Estimate is based on the

supply and installation of chain

link fencing at $93.75/m

Responsibility: Railway or

Roadway Authority



$150,000.00

Total Cost Estimate (±40%): $150,000.00

Table 4: Bennett Road (Mile 289.08) – Observations and Recommended Actions – Future

Actions

Note that provisions are made in Tables 3 and 4 for recording the decision of the appropriate

authorities relative to the assessment findings.



4.4 Cobbledick Road (Mile 287.26, CN Kingston Subdivision)



Rail

• Railway Company: Canadian National Railway

• Subdivision: Kingston

• Mile: 287.26

• Number of Tracks: 3

• Track Type: Mainline


Road

• Road Authority: The Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington

• Road Name: Cobbledick Road

• Road Classification: Rural Local Undivided

• Number of Lanes: 2

• Sidewalks, Paths or Trails: None provided

Crossing Type • Active Crossing equipped with Railway Crossing Signs, Flashing

Lights, Bells and Gates (FLBG)

Rail Operations

• Maximum Railway Operating Speed (passenger): 100 mph

• Maximum Railway Operating Speed (freight): 65 mph

• Daily Train Volume (total passenger and freight): 44

Road Operations

• Road Crossing Design Speed: 50 km/h

• Average Annual Daily Traffic (AADT) : 826

• Vehicle types using the crossing: Standard roadway traffic,

standard single unit bus (B-12) used as design vehicle

Sightlines

• Crossing is an active grade crossing with gates and is exempted

from DSSD and DSTOPPED sightline requirements.

• Visibility of the flashing light units and Railway Crossing Signs

from the SSD is:

o Clear on both road approaches; may be obstructed by

vegetation on the SE quadrant during spring and summer.

Vegetation to be monitored (Photo 15 and 21).

o Back lights are obstructed along Service Road, by the

warning system housing unit on the south west quadrant.

(Photo 14)

• Sightline data was collected during the winter and sightlines

must be re-assessed in the spring/summer when foliage is in

place.

Incident History • No reported crashes at the crossing within the past five years

Trespassing

• No evidence of trespassing observed within 400m (1/4 mile)

each side of crossing, on November 14 2017 and January 18

2018.

Nearby Switching

Operations / Yards

• Switching operations 120m east of crossing.



Nearby Railway

Bridges / Trestles

and Other Structures


Other Nearby

Crossings


Compliance with

Regulatory

Requirements

• GCR §104 (a)

o Proposed location for whistle cessation is within a rail right-

of-way and road approach as defined by the GCR

• GCR §104 (b)

o Crossing is equipped with flashing lights, bells and gates and

satisfies Table D-1 of the GCS

o Compliance with articles 12 to 16 of the GCS to be

confirmed, based on receipt of data from CN.

• GCR §104 (c)

o No evidence of trespassing observed within 400m (1/4 mile)

on each side of the grade crossing

• GCR §104 (d)

o Crossing is not located within 400m (1/4mile) of another

grade crossing which requires whistling.

Table 5: Cobbledick Road (Mile 287.26) – General Information



Recommendations:

The Road Authority (the Municipality) and the Railway Company (CN) may implement whistle

cessation at the crossing located at Cobbledick Road, Mile 287.26, CN Kingston

Subdivision, Clarington, ON subject to the following suggested remediation listed in Tables 6

and 7. Recommended Actions for immediate and future actions have been separated as per

Tables 6 and 7, respectively. Recommended Actions include an indication of the party

responsible for implementation. Actions are also assigned an implementation category based on

the regulatory requirements and the timelines for their implementation, as specified in the Grade

Crossing Regulations. The implementation categories are as follows:

• Category A: Requirement under the Grade Crossing Regulations; basic requirement

that must be implemented immediately or warning system maintenance issues covered

under Article 17 of the Grade Crossing Standards

• Category B: Requirement under the Grade Crossing Regulations; additional

requirement that must be implemented within seven years after the Grade Crossing

Regulations comes into force (by November 2021)

• Category C: Requirement under the Grade Crossing Regulations; to be addressed

when the affected component is changed (no implementation timeline specified)

• Category D: Other recommendations; not required under the Grade Crossing

Regulations but recommended based on guidelines and best practices


Agree (Y/N)

Comments

1. Grade Crossing Surface

Crossing surface is uneven

due to the condition of the

crossing planks. (Photo 6

and 8)

Replace crossing planks or reconstruct crossing surface to ensure a smooth surface. Responsibility: Railway

Company

Implementation: Category B

Cost Estimate (±40%): $75,000.00* *Cost estimate is based on an estimated unit price of $25,000.00 per rehabilitation/reconstruction of one 40ft crossing.



Agree (Y/N)

Comments

2. Sightlines

DSTOPPED sightlines in the

SW quadrant are restricted

by warning system housing

unit.

Crossing is exempt from

DSTOPPED requirements;

however, sightlines may be

improved by relocating the

bungalow in SW quadrant.


Company


Cost Estimate (±40%): TBD*


provided. Provision of

sightlines along the railway

right of way the responsibility of

the Railway Company.

Visibility of the east mast,

flashing light units and

Railway Crossing Sign on

the south road approach

may be obstructed by

vegetation along the east

side of the road at the

required SSD of 110m.

(Vegetation conditions could

not be assessed as field

audit was completed in

January)

Monitor vegetation and trim to

improve visibility of the flashing

light units and Railway

Crossing Sign.

Responsibility: Roadway

Authority

Implementation: Category A


$1,000.00




Agree (Y/N)

Comments

3. Signs and Pavement Markings





MUTCDC recommended

limits:

• Distance from

nearest rail: 179.8m

(50m -150m)





road users.






Sign along Service Road do

not meet the MUTCDC

recommended limits:

• Distance from

Cobbledick Road:

167.8m (50m -150m)

• Lateral placement:

1.8m (2.0m – 4.5m)





road users.




“X” pavement markings on

the south road approach

appears to have completely

faded.

Remove and repaint “X”

pavement markings on the

south approach as per

MUTCDC recommendations,

10m beyond the WA-18 signs

and should take into

consideration the


the associated WA-18 sign as

per MUTCDC

recommendations.




$1000.00



Agree (Y/N)

Comments

“X” pavement markings on

the north road is fading.

Remove and repaint “X”

pavement markings on the

south approach as per

MUTCDC recommendations,

10m beyond the WA-18 signs

and should take into

consideration the


the associated WA-18 sign as

per MUTCDC

recommendations.




$1,000.00

Stop bars on both road

approaches are fading.

Remove and repaint stop bars

on both road approaches as

per MUTCDC

recommendations. Stop bars

should be provided 2m in

advance of the warning

system.




$1,000.00

Directional dividing line does

not extend for 30m south of

crossing. Directional dividing

line is present on south road

approach between crossing

and Service Road

intersection.

Extend directional dividing line

south of service road

intersection for a total length of

at least 30m from crossing.







Agree (Y/N)

Comments


Sign on the north and south

road approach do not depict

the number of tracks at the

crossing.



approach is damaged and is

leaning eastward.


that depicts the track

configuration as per MUTCDC

recommendations.




$1,000.00


Sign on service road does

not depict the roadway

configuration or number of

tracks at the crossing.


that depicts the track and

roadway configuration as per

MUTCDC recommendations.




4. Grade Crossing Warning System

The clearance distance from

the edge of the travelled

way is 0.5m for the south

signal mast which is less

than the GCS limit of

1.875m for roadways

without a curb.

Relocate warning system mast

to meet GCS limits; or

construct curb at least 0.625m

from the warning system

clearance point to protect the

warning system.


Company; involvement from

Road Authority is required for

curb option.



$2,000.00

$3,000.00 (Construction of

curb)



Agree (Y/N)

Comments

The distance between the

top of the foundation and

the surrounding ground

surface is 300mm for the

north signal mast and

190mm for the south signal

mast. This exceeds the

GCS maximum limit of

100mm.

Railway Company to ensure

grade crossing warning system

foundations are in compliance

with the GCS.


Company;




provided. Warning system

maintenance per GCS

requirements is the

responsibility of the Railway

Company.

Total Cost Estimate (±40%): $84,250.00 (with

relocation of

warning system)

$85,250.00 (with

construction of

curb)

Table 6: Cobbledick Road (Mile 287.26) – Observations and Recommended Actions –

Immediate Actions




Agree (Y/N)

Comments

1. Location of the Grade Crossing

“D” distance to the nearest

intersection is 19.5m

(private driveway) and 20m

(Service Road) which is less

than the GCS limit of 30m.

Front lights are visible for

vehicles turning from the

above mentioned property

accesses on both road

approaches. (Photo 13, 14,

19, 21)

Property access locations are

an existing condition and may

remain. Any future changes to

the location of the crossing or

intersections must apply the

GCS requirements in a manner

that improves overall safety.




2. Road Geometry

Shoulders on the north road

approach vary just north of

the crossing towards the

Highway 401 overpass.

Future changes to the roadway

cross-section must ensure that

the width of the travelled way

and shoulders at the crossing

surface are not less than the

width of travelled way and the

shoulder on the road

approaches.






Agree (Y/N)

Comments

Gradient within 8m of the

nearest rail is 3.4% on the

north road approach and

5.5% on the south road

approach which exceeds the

GCS limit of 2.0%.




must apply the GCS



If the crossing is designated for

the use of persons with

assistive devices, gradients are

not to exceed 1.0% within 5m

of the crossing.




Difference between the road

approach gradient and the

railway cross-slope, 5.4%

on the south road approach

and 5.2 on the north road

approach, exceeds the GCS

limit of 2.0% on road

approaches classified as

Rural Local Undivided.




must apply the GCS






Table 7: Cobbledick Road (Mile 287.26) – Observations and Recommended Actions –

Future Actions

Note that provisions are made in Tables 6 and 7 for recording the decision of the appropriate

authorities relative to the assessment findings.



4.5 Cost Estimate Summary

Tables 8 and 9 provide a cost estimate summary per implementation category for the Observations and Recommended Immediate Actions and Future Actions, respectively.

Crossing Cost Estimate – Implementation Category Total Cost

Estimate Category A Category B Category C Category D

Bennett Road $0.00 $83,000.00 $2,000.00/

$3,000.00 $5,500.00

$90,500.00/

$91,500.00

Cobbledick Road $1,000.00 $75,000.00 $2,000.00/

$3,000.00 $6,250.00

$84,250.00/

$85,250.00

Table 8: Cost Estimate Summary – Immediate Actions

Crossing Cost Estimate – Implementation Category Total Cost

Estimate Category A Category B Category C Category D Bennett Road $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $150,000.00 $150,000.00

Cobbledick Road $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00

Table 9: Cost Estimate Summary – Future Actions


5.0 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

The execution of a Crossing Safety Assessment is a proactive strategy to aid in determining

existing conditions and safety measures in place at a railway crossing for all crossing users.

Train whistling is a crucial safety measure that provides motorists, cyclists and pedestrians with

advance warning of an approaching train. Whistle cessation is an option that is recommended

for implementation once recommended actions for safety improvements at the crossings have

been completed.

It should be noted that for a crossing to be considered for an exemption from whistling, the

requirements in section 104 of the GCR and Appendix D of the GCS must be met. Observations

and suggested actions outlined within this report outside of section 104 of the GCR and

Appendix D of the GCS are not required for the crossing to be considered for an exemption from

whistling but are recommended to improve the level of safety at each facility.

Based on the study completed on both crossings located at Bennett Road and Cobbledick

Road, the two crossings are eligible for whistle cessation as per Appendix D subject to

implementation of recommended actions for safety improvements.

Further assessment pursuant to GCR for compliance with the requirements specified within

section 104, notably section 104 b), to enable exemption from the regulatory train whistling

requirements is to be determined and subject to this assessment once additional information

has been provided from CN.

It should be noted that cessation of whistling reduces the road safety at the railway crossings

and increases potential liability and risk to the Municipality. Future development and future

traffic impacts south of the crossings at Bennett Road and Cobbledick Road were not analyzed

in the study. However, it is expected that the study area may observe an increase of vehicular,

pedestrian and recreational traffic due to the increase of residential developments which will

require the safety at these two crossings to be fully maintained. Further risk assessments are

recommended to be completed once the future development has been constructed.

It is recommended that the Municipality consider the grade separation of Bennett Road and

Cobbledick Road as an option for whistle cessation as it will eliminate the increased potential of

safety hazards brought by the expected increase of pedestrian, vehicular and railway traffic that

may possibly be brought to the area by the future subdivision developments. Such hazards

include but are not limited to unauthorized access to the railway right of way and collisions at

the railway grade crossings.



Note:

The field investigation/audit of the grade crossings at 287.26 and 289.08 of the CN Kingston Subdivision in Clarington, ON covers physical features which may affect road and rail user safety and it has sought to identify potential safety hazards. However, the auditors point out that no guarantee is made that every deficiency has been identified. Further, if all of the recommendations in this report were to be addressed, this would not confirm that the crossing is ‘safe’; rather, adoption of the recommendations should improve the level of safety at this facility.

NOTE: The safety assessment of this grade crossing covers physical features which may affect road and rail user safety, and identifies potential safety hazards. However, the auditors point out that no guarantee is made that every deficiency has been identified. Further, if all of the recommendations in this assessment were to be addressed, this would not confirm that the crossing is ‘safe’, rather, adoption of the recommendations should improve the level of safety at this facility.

FIELD DATA FORMS

Active Public Crossings

Bennett Road, Mile 289.08, CN Kingston Subdivision, Corporation of Municipality of

Clarington, Ontario

Active Public Crossings KI_M289.08 - 1

Date of Assessment:

Assessment Team Members & Affiliations:

Reason for Assessment: periodic assessment significant change in infrastructure significant change in road or rail volumes

x cessation of whistling significant change in train operations significant change in road or rail speeds

change in vehicle types 2+ fatal collisions in 5yr. period other collision experience (see below)

Collision History (5-year period):

Property Damage Collisions:

+ Personal Injury Collisions: Number of Persons Injured:

+ Fatal Injury Collisions: Number of Persons Killed:

= Total Collisions in the last 5 year period:

Details of Collisions:

0

Track Type: Mainline

Subdivision: Kingston Spur:

Type of Grade Crossing: FLBG

Location Number:

Road Classification: Rural Local Undivided

Railway: CN Mile: 289.08

Municipality: Corporation of Municipality of

Clarington

Province: Ontario

Location Reference:

Ian De Vera, Evgeniy Orlov, Jared Chernoff, WSP

Railway Company: Canadian National Railway Road Authority: Corporation of Municipality of

Clarington

Crossing Location: Bennett Road Road Name / Number: Bennett Road

Sheet 1 Grade Crossing Safety Assessment Active Crossings

21/11/2017, 18/01/2018


SCENE PHOTOGRAPHS


The Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington – Train Whistle Cessation Study Crossing No.1: Bennett Road - KI_M289.08-SP WSP Canada Group Limited | January 2018 SP-1-1

Photo 1: Road approach, looking north.

Photo 2: Northeast quadrant.

The Corporation of the Municipality of Clarginton – Train Whistle Cessation Study Crossing No.1: Bennett Road - KI_M289.08-SPSP

SP-1YR-3-2 WSP Canada Group | January 2018

Photo 3: Rail approach, looking east.

Photo 4: Southeast quadrant.


Photo 5: Road approach, looking south.

Photo 6: Southwest quadrant.



Photo 7: Rail approach, looking west.

Photo 8: Northwest quadrant.


Photo 9: DSTOPPED sightlines, north road approach looking west (to the driver’s right).

Photo 10: DSTOPPED sightlines, north road approach looking east (to the driver’s left).



Photo 11: DSTOPPED sightlines, south road approach looking east (to the driver’s right).

Photo 12: DSTOPPED sightlines, south road approach looking west (to the driver’s left).


Photo 13: Gradient through crossing, looking south. Uneven transition between north road approach

and crossing, with positive gradient through crossing towards south road approach.

Photo 14: Poor transition from north road approach to crossing surface.



Photo 15: Poor asphalt conditions on north road approach with loose gravel and pavement cracks.

Photo 16: Poor asphalt conditions on south road approach with loose gravel and potholes present.


Photo 17: Noted scrap crossing plank material placed on the south east quadrant of the crossing.

Photo 18: Property access on south road approach, east side, 5m from crossing.



Photo 19: Property access on south road approach, east side, 14m from crossing.

Photo 20: Waterfront Trail access on south road approach, east side, 25m from crossing.


Photo 21: Above property accesses on south road approach, east side.

Photo 22: South road approach, crossing at SSD of 110m for road speed of 50km/h. “X” pavement

markings are not present.



Photo 23: “Stop Before Crossing” sign placed along south road approach, east side of road.

Photo 24: “Report if BlockedE” sign placed along south road approach east side of road, sign is leaning

eastward.


Photo 25: WA-18 sign, WA-22 sign and “Be Prepared to Stop” sign placed on same pole on south road

approach. Signs are not aligned perpendicular to the road.

Photo 26: Truck traversing crossing, required to slow down to safely navigate through crossing due to

uneven transition and grade changes through crossing. Stop bars are not present on the south road approach.



Photo 27: Front light units on the south road approach aligned towards intermediate areas on the south

east quadrant.

Photo 28: North road approach, crossing at SSD of 110m for road speed of 50km/h. “X” pavement

markings are not present.


Photo 29: WA-18 sign, WA-22 sign placed on same pole on north road approach.

Photo 30: “Be Prepared to Stop” sign on the north road approach.



Photo 31: “Dismount Before Crossing”, “Stop Before Crossing” and “Report if BlockedE” sign on the

north road approach.

NOTE: All references to direction in this safety review are keyed to this diagram.

Sheet 2 SCENE SKETCH Active Crossings


Mile 289.08

CN Kingston Subdivision

8

9

°


Bennett R

oad

THE CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY

OF CLARINGTON - TRAIN WHISTLE CESSATION STUDY

Jan 2018SS-1

Scale

1:500

Bennett Road

(Mile 289.08 CN Kingston Subdivision)

Scene Sketch

#

Crossing Type

Flashing Lights,

Bells and Gates

Bennett R

oad

Toronto

Ottaw

a

West approach

East approach

Wate

rfro

nt T

rail

Maximum Railway Operating Speed, VT = mph = km/h

Daily Train Volume Freight trains/day:

Passenger trains/day:

Switching during dayime? Switching during nighttime?

Average Annual Daily Traffic, AADT = vpd Year of Count:

High seasonal fluctuation in volumes?

Pedestrian Volume = pedestrians/day

Cyclist Volume = cyclists/day

Is crossing on a School Bus Route?

Do Dangerous Goods Trucks use this roadway?

Regular use of crossing by persons with Assistive Devices?

Other special road users? Type: Daily Volume:

Forecasted AADT = Forecast Year:

Road Crossing Design Speed = km/h

Surrounding Land Use: Urban/rural?

Any schools, retirement homes, etc. nearby?

Notes:

T indicates information should be confirmed by field observation

1. Road Authority should provide plans if available.

2. Forecast AADT until next assessment if significant developments are expected or if a planned bypass may reduce volumes.

ObserveN/A

Road T 50

Observe Residential, Agricultural Rural

Road T N/A N/A

Road N/A N/A

Road T Not Observed

Road T Not Observed

Road N.M.

Road T Not Observed

Road Not Observed

Road N.M.

Rail TBD TBD

Road 24 TBD

Rail 100 161

Rail12

32

Sheet 3 GENERAL INFORMATION

Source Item Reference


GCS Section 10


Type:

Length, L = m

Stopping Sight Distance, SSD = m

Clearance Distance, cd = m

Vehicle Travel Distance, S = L + cd = m

Vehicle Departure Time, TD = J + T = sec

J = sec = driver's reaction time

T = (t x G) = sec = the time for the design vehicle to travel through S

t = sec = the time for the design vehicle to accelerate through S

G = = ratio of acceleration time on grade/grade adjustment factor

maximum approach grade within S = %

Do field acceleration times exceed TD?

TP = sec

VP = m/s (maximum 1.22 m/s)look-up 1.22

Pedestrian, Cyclist & Assistive Devices Departure Time, TP = cd/VP

calculate 12.7

observe N/A

Road Grade Effect:

Road 4

look-up 1.30 GDG T2.3.3.2

calculate 11.1

look-up 8.5 GDG Fig. 2.3.3.3

calculate 13.1 Sect. 10.3.2

look-up 2 Sect. 10.3.2

calculate 27 Sect. 10.2.1

look-up 110 Sect. 7.5

measure 15.5 Fig. 10-1

look-up 11.5 Sect. 10.3.1

Design Vehicle

Rail Heavy Single-Unit Trucks Sect. 10.3.1

Sheet 4 DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS GCS Section 10



GCS Section 11


"D" should not be less than 30m for either approach if train speed exceeds 15 mph.

"D" = m on N approach = m on S approach

Are there pedestrian crossings on either road approach that could cause vehicles to queue back

to the tracks?

Is "D" insufficient such that road vehicles might queue onto the tracks?

Is "D" insufficient such that road vehicles turning from a side street might not see warning

devices for the crossing?

Comments Following Site Visit:North Road Approach

-no property accesses/intersections within 30m.

Property accesses on the South Road Approach within 30m of the crossing:

-5m (east side; railway service road)

-14m (east side, property access)

-24m (east side, Waterfront Trail )

observeNo

observe

No

No

measure Fig. 11-1N/A 14

Sheet 5 LOCATION OF GRADE CROSSING GCS Section 11



GCS Section 5


Is the crossing smooth enough to allow road vehicles, pedestrians, cyclists and other road users

to cross at their normal speed without consequence? Comment below.

Grade Crossing Surface Material:

Approach Road Surface Type:

Approach Road Surface Condition:

Roadway Illumination?

Road Crossing Surface Width = m

Centre Lane/Median Width

= m

Travelled Way Width

= m on W side = m on E side

Paved Shoulder Width


Surface Extension beyond Travel Lanes/Shoulder


Distance between Travel Lane/Shoulder and Sidewalk/Path/Trail


Sidewalk/Path/Trail Width


Surface Extension beyond Sidewalk/Path/Trail


Cross-Section:

Flangeway width = mm (min. = 65 mm; max. = 75 mm1 or 120 mm)

Flangeway depth = mm (min. = 50 mm; max. = 75 mm1 or no limit)

Field Side Gap width = mm (max. = 120 mm or 0 mm1)

Field Side Gap depth = mm (max. = no limit or 0 mm1)

Elevation of Top Rail above road surface = mm (max. = 13 mm1 or 25 mm)

Elevation of Top Rail below road surface = mm (min. = -7 mm1 or -25 mm)

1. Public sidewalks, paths or trails designated by the road authority for use of persons using assistive devices

Comments Following Site Visit:-Crossing appears to be very bumpy and appears to be within superelevated area. Rail is raised above

crossing planks due to superelevation.

The condition of both road approaches is poor within 125m of the crossing. Road approaches are unpaved.

There are also potholes and loose gravel on both road approaches.

Poor paving within crossing is noted.

Please see the following page for notes regarding Flangeway width, flageway depth and fieldside gap width.

Rail Notes Table 5-1






N/A N/A

N/A N/A

3.3

0 0

2.9 2.9

N/A N/A

observe

Asphalt

Poor

No

measure

12.4

Fig. 3-1

Fig. 5-1

N/A

3.3

observe Wooden Planks


observe Sect. 5.1No

Sheet 6 GRADE CROSSING SURFACE GCS Section 3, 5



Barnarde

Snapshot

Barnarde

Rectangle

Are the horizontal and vertical alignments smooth and continuous throughout SSD?

N Approach S Approach

Are the road lanes and shoulders at least the same width on the crossing as on the road approaches?


Within 8m % on N approach % on S approach (max. = 2%)

Between 8m to 18m % on N approach % on S approach (max. = 5%)

Road Classification

Allowable difference between roadway gradient and railway cross-slope = %

Road approach gradient at crossing: % on N approach % on S approach

Railway Cross Slope: %

Is the difference between the road approach gradient and the railway cross slope, or the railway

gradient and the road approach cross slope, in accordance with the design standards of the Geometric

Design Guide (Table 2.3.13.1)?


Are rail tracks super elevated?


Grade Crossing Angle = °

(70° min and 110° max without warning system; 30° min and 150° max with warning system)

Condition of Road Approaches: anything that might affect stopping or acceleration. Comment.

Is there any evidence that "low-bed" trucks have difficulty negotiating the crossing?

i.e. might they bottom-out or get stuck?

Comments Following Site Visit:Vertical alignments from the north road approach through the crossing along the south road approach are

not smooth and continuous. Paving/crossing surface at crossing provides for bumpy transition.

Railway Cross Slope:

North Track: 4.8%; South Track: 6.0%

Allowable difference between the road approach gradient and the railway cross-slope is not in accordance

with 6.2 of the GCS:

North Road Approach: difference = 8.2% (allowable difference 2% for roadway classified as Rural Local

Undivided).

Gradient of the north road approach within 8m of the nearest rail is 3.6% which exceeds the GCS limit of

2%.

Road89

Sect. 6.5

observe

observeNot Observed

observeSect. 6.2

GDG T-2.3-13.1

Not Observed Not Observed

RailYes Yes

look-up Rural Local Undivided Sect. 6.2

GDG T-2.3-13.1calculate 2

measure-3.6 -0.8 Sect. 6.2

GDG T-2.3-13.1See notes below

measure

Road Approach Grades

Sect. 6.3-3.6 -0.8

-4.0 -2.0

observe Sect. 6.4Yes Yes

Grades:


observe Sect. 6.1No No

Sheet 7 ROAD GEOMETRY GCS Section 6


GCS Section 7


Driver Eye Height = 1.05m passenger vehicles, pedestrians, cyclists & assistive devices

= 1.80m buses & single-unit trucks

= 2.10m large trucks & tractor-trailers

Target Height = 1.20m above rails

Type of Grade Crossing: Are gates present?

Is the crossing exempted from sightline requirements?

SSD minimum = m

SSD actual: N Approach m S Approach m

For Users Stopped at a Grade Crossing (See Fig 7-1(a))

DSTOPPED = 1.47VT x TSTOPPED where VT = railway design speed in mph (Sheet 4)

and TSTOPPED = departure times TD or TP (Sheet 4)

Is crossing exempted from DSTOPPED requirements?

Design Vehicle Departure Time (TD) = sec (from sheet 4)

Pedestrian, Cyclist & Assistive Device Departure Time (TP) = sec (from sheet 4)

DSTOPPED-D minimum = ft = m

DSTOPPED-P minimum = ft = m

DSTOPPED actual N Approach m to driver's left m to driver's right

S Approach m to driver's left m to driver's right

Are there any obstacles within the sight triangles that affect visibility? Comment.

Comments Following Site Visit:Crossing is equipped with flashing lights, bells and gates and is exempt from DSSD and DSTOPPED sightline

requirements.

Actual DSTOPPED on the north road approach to the driver's right is 117.5m, restricted due to railway curve

on east rail approach.

Actual DSTOPPED on the north road approach to the driver's left is 103m, restricted due to railway curve on

west rail approach.

Actual SSD is greater than 110m.

Visibility of the front light units on both road appraoches is clear.

measure N/A N/A

observe No

calculate 1868 569

measure 103 118

Sect. 7.2

Fig. 7-1

look-up Yes

look-up 13.1

look-up 12.7

calculate 1924 587

look-up 110

measure 110 110 Sect. 7.2

Warning: some formulae are based on Imperial units while others are Metric


look-up FLBG Yes

GCR Sect. 22look-up Yes

Sheet 8 SIGHTLINES GCS Section 7, 10


GCS Section 8


Railway Crossing Sign

Are signs present?


Are signs as shown in Figure 8-1(a)?


Number of Tracks Sign

Are signs present?


Are signs required?


Are signs as shown in Figure 8-1(b)?


Are signs installed on the supporting post of each railway crossing sign as shown in Figure 8-3(c)?

N Approach S Approachobserve Fig. 8-3

Yes Yes

Comments Following Site Visit:

look-up Sect 4.1.2Yes Yes

observe Fig. 8-1Yes Yes


observe Sect 4.1.2Yes Yes




Sect. 8.1

MUTCDC A2.2.7

observe Sect. 4.1.2Yes Yes

Sheet 9 SIGNS AND PAVEMENT MARKINGS GCS Section 8


GCS Section 8


Railway Crossing Ahead Sign (WA-18, 19 & 20)

Are signs present?


Are signs required?


Do signs have the appropriate orientation?


Distance to nearest rail:

N Approach m S Approach m

Lateral Placement:


Height:


Advisory Speed Tab Sign (WA-7S)

Are signs present?


Are signs required?


Are signs mounted on the same post as the Railway Crossing Ahead Sign?


Posted speed limit?

N Approach S Approachobserve

N/A N/A


look-up GCR Sect. 66No No

observe MUTCDC A3.2.5N/A N/A

Sect. 8.2

MUTCDC 3.2.5

observeNo No

1.8 2.2 MUTCDC A1.7.2

Comments Following Site Visit:Sign post for the Railway Crossing Ahead Sign (WA-18) on the south road approach is not perpendicular to

the road.

Railway Crossing Ahead Sign on the north road approach does not meet the following MUTCDC

recommendations:

• Distance: 166m from the nearest rail, which exceeds the MUTCDC recommended limit of 150m.

Railway Crossing Ahead Sign on the south road approach does not meet the following MUTCDC

recommendations:

• Lateral Placement: 1.8m from the edge of travelled way, which does not meet the MUTCDC recommended

minimum limit of 2.0m


measure

166 95.3 MUTCDC A3.1.4

3 1.8 MUTCDC A1.7.2


observe MUTCDC Fig. C1-6Yes Yes


Sect. 8.2

MUTCDC 3.4.2

observeYes Yes



Emergency Notification Sign

Are signs present?


Are signs required?


Are signs oriented to face traffic approaching the grade crossing or parallel to the road?


Are signs legible to road vehicles?


What is the condition of the sign?


Pavement Markings

Are pavement markings consistent with those from the MUTCDC Manual?

Are there directional dividing lines for at least 30 m on both road approaches?

Are there lines to delineate sidewalks, paths and trails?

Please see the following page for comments regarding the additional signs noted during the site visit on

November 14, 2017.

observe N/A

Comments Following Site Visit:No sidewalk on either road approach.

No pavement markings noted on either road approach.

General Comments Regarding Signs & Pavement Markings:

observe No MUTCDC Fig. C1-6

observe No MUTCDC C2.1

Comments Following Site Visit:Emergency Notification Sign is installed on the warning system housing unit in the southwest quadrant,

parallel to the roadway. Due to the location of the sign, the sign may not be visible to road users.

Emergency notification signs also placed on both signal masts within view of drivers stopped at crossing

which meets GCS requirements.



observeGood Good

look-up GCR Sect. 63Yes Yes


Sect. 8.5

observeYes Yes




- Additional signs installed in proximity to crossing: o North Road Approach

"Stop Before Crossing" sign: Height: 2.0m ; Offset: 3.7m; Location: 30m "Dismount before crossing" sign: Height: 3.1; Offset 3.7m; Location: 30m "Report if Blocked"... sign: Height: 1.45m; Offset: 3.7m; Location: 30m WA-22 Sign: Height: 1.5m; Offset: 3.8m; Location: 166m

o South Road Approach

"Stop Before Crossing" sign: Height: 1.0m ; Offset: 1.9m; Location: 32m "Report if Blocked"... sign: Height: 1.0m; Offset: 2.4m; Location: 59m*

Sign is leaning "Be Prepared to Stop" sign: Height: 1.2m; Offset: 1.8m; Location: 95.3m WA-22 Sign: Height: 0.5m; Offset: 1.8m; Location: 95.3m

Barnarde

Rectangle

GCS Section 9


Warrants for a Warning System Without Gates

If any of A through E below are met, then a warning system without gates is required

A. AADT = vpd Daily Train Movements = trains per day

Cross-Product = (2,000 min.)

Warranted?

B. Is there a sidewalk, path or trail?

Railway Design Speed = mph

Warranted?

C. Are there two or more lines of railway where trains may pass each other?

Is the railway design speed > 15 mph?

Warranted?

D. Is D < 30 m to a Stop Sign at an intersection?


Warranted?

E. Is D < 60 m to a signalized intersection?


Warranted?

Warrants for a Warning System With Gates

If a warning system is warranted, and any of F through J are met, then gates are also required

F. Cross-Product = (50,000 min.)

Warranted?

G. Are there two or more lines of railway where trains may pass each other?

Warranted?

H. Is the railway design speed > 50 mph?

Warranted?

I. Is D < 30 m to a Stop Sign at an intersection?

Warranted?

J. Is D < 60 m to a signalized intersection?

Warranted?look-up

No

Sect. 9.2.1.eNo


look-upYes

Sect. 9.2.1.cYes

look-upNo

Sect. 9.2.1.dNo

look-up1,056

Sect. 9.2.1.aNo

RailYes

Sect. 9.2.1.bYes

look-up

No

Sect. 9.1.d.iiiYes

No

Sect. 9.2

Rail

Yes

Sect. 9.1.d.iYes

Yes

look-up

No

Sect. 9.1.d.iiYes

No

No

look-up

No

Sect. 9.1.b,c100

Yes


Sect. 9.1

look-up

24 44.00

Sect. 9.1.a1,056

Sheet 12 GRADE CROSSING WARNING SYSTEM WARRANTS GCS Section 9


Warning Systems Clearance Distance from Railway

Min. 3.66 m (12 ft) for signal mast or 3.05 m (10 ft) for end of gate arm; from centreline of track


Warning System Clearance Distance from Roadway

Min. 625 mm from curb; or 1.875 m from travelled way and 625 mm from shoulder


Distance between top of foundation and surrounding ground level (max. 100 mm (4 in))

N Approach mm S Approach mm

Is the slope of surrounding ground from foundation towards the travelled way less than 25% (4:1)?


Light units: N Approach S Approach

Condition:

Bells: N Approach S Approach

Condition:

Gates: N Approach S Approach

Condition:

Cantilever Lights: N Approach S Approach

Condition:

If there is only one sidewalk, is a bell located on the adjacent assembly?

Design Approach Warning Time: W Approach sec E Approach sec

Should be greatest of:

a) 20s, unless cd > 11 m, increase the 20s by one second for each additional 3 m sec

b) TD sec

c) TP sec

d) TG + gate arm descent time + 5s sec

e) Minimum warning time required for traffic signal pre-emption sec

f) TSSD sec

Actual Approach Warning Time: W Approach sec E Approach sec

Comments Following Site Visit:TBD = To be Determined. 'Slope of ground from foundation towards the travelled way was unable to be

determined due to snow conditions on ground.

'N.M = Not measured during site visit. C.N to provide information.

Bell is present, however no sidewalk is present.

The clearance distance from the edge of the travelled way is 1.3m for the south signal mast, which is less

than the GCS limit of 1.875m for roadways without a curb.

The distance between the top of the foundation and the surrounding ground surface exceeds the GCS

maximum limit of 100mm for both signal masts.

look-up 10

Rail N.M N.M Sect. 16.2

13

look-up 13

look-up 27

look-up N/A

observe N/A Sect. 15.1.2

Rail 27 27

Sect. 16.1.1

look-up 22

look-up

observeYes Yes

Sect. 15.2Good

observeNo No

Sect. 13.3

observeYes Yes

Sect. 13, 14Good

observeYes Yes

Sect. 15.1Good

measure Sect. 12.1.c170 170

measure Sect. 12.1.cTBD TBD

observeAREMA C&S Manual

Part 3.1.36 C.6.5.5 5.8

measure Sect. 12.1.a,b

2.6 1.3

Sheet 13 GRADE CROSSING WARNING SYSTEMS GCS Section 12-16



GCS Section 12


Front and Back Lights for Vehicles

Are signal assemblies as shown in Figure 12-1?

Alignment Height: N Approach m S Approach m

Are primary light units visible for at least the minimum SSD?


Are additional light units required to cover intermediate areas of the road approaches?


Are back light units visible by stopped vehicles at least 15 m?


Are lights installed exclusively for sidewalks, paths or trails visible for at least 30 m?


Additional Lights for Sidewalks, Paths, Trails, etc.

Distance from path centreline to signal mast (max 3.6m)


Are separate flashing light units required for pedestrians?


Cantilever Light Units

Are cantilevers as shown in Figure 12-3?

Distance from nearest rail: N Approach m S Approach m

Distance from travelled way: N Approach m S Approach m

Height: N Approach m S Approach m

DR: N Approach m S Approach m

DL: N Approach m S Approach m

Are Cantilever lights required?

N Approach S Approachlook-up Sect. 13.3.1

No No

Comments Following Site Visit:Front light units are aligned to cover access roads on the south east quadrant.

measure N/A N/A Fig. 13-1(a),(b)

measure N/A N/A Fig. 13-1(b)

measure N/A N/A

measure N/A N/A Fig 13-1

observe N/A Sect. 12.1

measure N/A N/A

calculate Fig. 13-2N/A N/A

look-up Sect. 13.4.1No No

observe Sect. 14.6.1N/A N/A

observe Sect. 14.4.1No No


measure 2.75 2.75 Fig. 12-1

observe Sect. 14.3.1.aYes Yes


observe Yes Sect. 12.1

Sheet 14 FLASHING LIGHT UNITS GCS Section 13, 14


GCS Section 12


Are gates as shown in Figure 12-2?

Gate Arm Clearance Time for Vehicles

TG = greater of TG,SSD or TG,STOP

TG,SSD = Gate Arm Clearance Distance from SSD / Road Speed in m/s

TG,SSD = (SSD + 2m + L) / 0.278V

TG,SSD = sec

TG,STOP = Gate Arm Clearance from Stop

TG,STOP = J + (tG x G) tG = sec

TG,STOP = sec

TG = sec

Gate arm delay: N Approach sec S Approach sec

Are strips on the gate arm 406 mm (16 in.) wide and aligned vertically?


Distance between the end of the gate arm and the edge of the travelled way


Gate arm descent time: sec Gate arm ascent time: sec

Comments Following Site Visit:N.M = Not Meadured during site visit. C.N to provide information.

measure Sect. 12.1.eN.M N.M

measure 12.1 6 Sect. 15.2.2

measure N.M N.M Sect. 15.2.3

measure Sect. 12.1.d.iYes Yes

calculate Sect. 10.4.18.9

6.02

9.82

9.8


observe TBD Sect. 12.1

Sheet 15 GATES FOR GRADE CROSSING WARNING SYSTEMS GCS Section 10, 12, 15


Warrants for a Prepare to Stop at Railway Crossing Sign

If any of A through C below are met, then a Prepare to Stop at Railway Crossing sign is required

A. Is the roadway classified as an expressway?

B. Is at least one set of front lights on the warning system not clearly visible within the stopping

sight distance of at least one of the lanes of the road approach?

C. Do weather conditions at the grade crossing repeatedly obscure the visibility of the warning

system?

Is a Prepare to Stop at Railway Crossing Sign required?

If any of D through E below are met, then a Prepare to Stop at Railway Crossing sign may be required

D. Is the speed limit of the travelled way greater than 90 km/h?

E. Is the crossing at the bottom of a hill or downgrade of considerable length?

Calculated Distance of Light Units

(See Advance Warning Flashers: Guidelines for Application and Installation (TAC 2005))

D = (Vtpr / 3.6) + (V2 / [25.92 x (a + Gg)])

V = km/h (posted speed limit

tpr = s (perception/reaction time)

a = m/s2

(deceleration rate; typically 2.6m/s2)

GN = m/100m (grade on approach)

GS = m/100m (grade on approach)

g = m/s2

(gravitational acceleration; 9.81m/s2)

Recommended minimum Advance Warning Flasher Distance from Railway


Actual Advance Warning Flasher Distance from Railway


Considering maximum prevailing speeds, geoemetry and traffic composition, check:

Does the sign flash:

a) in advance of the activation of light units of the warning system

b) during the time of operation of the light units of the warning system


Does the advance activation time provide sufficient time for a vehicle to:

a) clear the grade crossing before the arrival of railway equipment at the crossing surface (FLB)

b) clear the grade crossing before gate arms start to descend (FLBG)


observe Sect. 18.2

N/A N/A


observe Sect. 18.1

N/A N/A

71.5 67.9

measureN/A N/A

look-up -4.0

look-up -2.0

look-up 9.81

observe Yes MUTCDC A3.6.6

Advance Warning

Flashers: Guidelines for

Application and

Installation (TAC 2005)

look-up 50

look-up 2

look-up 2.6

look-up No GCR Sect. 67

look-up No MUTCDC A3.6.6

observe GCR Sect. 67(b)No

observe GCR Sect. 67(c)No


Sect. 18

MUTCDC A3.6.6

look-up No GCR Sect. 67(a)

Sheet 16 PREPARE TO STOP AT RAILWAY CROSSING SIGN GCS Section 18


Warrants for an Interconnected Traffic Signal

Is the railway design speed greater than 15 mph?

Is there less than 30m between the nearest rail of a grade crossing and the travelled way of an

intersection with traffic signals?

Is an Interconnected Traffic Signal required?

Are adjacent traffic signals interconnected with a grade crossing warning system?

note: provide timing plan if interconnected

Date of last pre-emption check?

Field checks:

Does interconnection provide adequate time to clear traffic from the grade crossing before the

arrival of railway equipment?

Does interconnection prohibit road traffic from moving from the street intersection towards the

grade crossing

Are there known queuing issues at the tracks?

Are pedestrians accomodated during the pre-emption?

Have longer/slower vehicles been considered?

Are supplemental signs needed for motorists?


observe N/A

observe N/A

observe N/A

observe N/A

observe Sect. 19.3.aN/A

observe Sect. 19.3.bN/A

Road N/A

Rail

Road N/A

Sect. 19

look-up Yes

Sect. 19.1measureNo

look-up No

Sheet 17 INTERCONNECTION OF TRAFFIC SIGNALS GCS Section 19



GCS Appendix D


Is train whistling prohibited at this crossing?

24 hours per day?

Is there evidence of routine unauthorized access (trespassing) on the rail line in the area of the

crossing? Comment below.

What is the required type of warning system as per Table D-1?

Are the requirements of Table D-1 met?observe Yes Appendix D

Comments Following Site Visit:No evidence of trespassing observed during the site visit on November 21 2017

Vehicular pathway is present along the SE ROW providing access for Railway Authority personnel. Pathway

is easily accessible and unauthorized use of path may occur.

observeNo

look-up FLBG Appendix D


RailNo

N/A

Sheet 18 WHISTLE CESSATION GCS Appendix D


Human Factors

• Control device visibility / background visual clutter

• Driver workload through this area (i.e., are there numerous factors that simultaneously require the driver's attention, such as

traffic lights, pedestrian activity, merging/entering traffic, commercial signing, etc.).

• Driver expectancy of the environment (i.e., are the control measures in keeping with the design levels of the road system and

adjacent environment).

• Need for positive guidance.

• Conflicts between road and railway signs and signals.

Environmental Factors

• Extreme weather conditions.

• Lighting issues (night, dawn/dusk, tunnels, adjacent facilities, headlight or sunlight glare, etc.).

• Landscaping or vegetation.

• Integration with surrounding land uses (e.g., parked vehicles blocking sightlines, merging traffic lanes, etc.).

All Road Users

• Have needs of the following been met:

- pedestrians (including strollers, baby carriages, and blind persons)

- children

- elderly

- bicyclists

- motorcyclists

- over-sized trucks

- buses

- recreational vehicles

- wheelchairs, scooters, walkers, etc.

- rollerblades

Additional Prompt Lists



NOTE: The safety assessment of this grade crossing covers physical features which may affect road and rail user safety, and identifies potential safety hazards. However, the auditors point out that no guarantee is made that every deficiency has been identified. Further, if all of the recommendations in this assessment were to be addressed, this would not confirm that the crossing is ‘safe’, rather, adoption of the recommendations should improve the level of safety at this facility.

FIELD DATA FORMS

Active Public Crossings

Cobbledick Road, Mile 287.26, CN Kingston Subdivision, Corporation of Municipality of

Clarington, Ontario


Date of Assessment:

Assessment Team Members & Affiliations:

Reason for Assessment: periodic assessment significant change in infrastructure significant change in road or rail volumes

x cessation of whistling significant change in train operations significant change in road or rail speeds

change in vehicle types 2+ fatal collisions in 5yr. period other collision experience (see below)

Collision History (5-year period):

Property Damage Collisions:

+ Personal Injury Collisions: Number of Persons Injured:

+ Fatal Injury Collisions: Number of Persons Killed:

= Total Collisions in the last 5 year period:

Details of Collisions:

0

Track Type: Mainline

Subdivision: Kingston Spur:

Type of Grade Crossing: FLBG

Location Number:

Road Classification: Rural Local Undivided

Railway: CN Mile: 287.26

Municipality: Corporation of Municipality of

Clarington

Province: Ontario

Location Reference:

Ian De Vera, Evgeniy Orlov, Jared Chernoff; WSP

Railway Company: Canadian National Railway Road Authority: Corporation of Municipality of

Clarington

Crossing Location: Cobbledick Road Road Name / Number: Cobbledick Road

Sheet 1 Grade Crossing Safety Assessment Active Crossings

14/11/2017, 18/01/2018


SCENE PHOTOGRAPHS


The Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington – Train Whistle Cessation Study Crossing No.2: Cobbledick Road - KI_M287.26-SP WSP Canada Group Limited | January 2018 SP-2-1

Photo 1: Road approach, looking north.

Photo 2: Northeast quadrant.

The Corporation of the Municipality of Clarginton – Train Whistle Cessation Study Crossing No.2: Cobbledick Road - KI_M287.26-SPSP


Photo 3: Rail approach, looking east.

Photo 4: Southeast quadrant.


Photo 5: Road approach, looking south.

Photo 6: Southwest quadrant.



Photo 7: Rail approach, looking west.

Photo 8: Northwest quadrant.


Photo 9: DSTOPPED sightlines, north road approach looking west (to the driver’s right).

Photo 10: DSTOPPED sightlines, north road approach looking east (to the driver’s left).



Photo 11: DSTOPPED sightlines, south road approach looking east (to the driver’s right).

Photo 12: DSTOPPED sightlines, south road approach looking west (to the driver’s left).


Photo 13: Private property access 20m from crossing along south road approach, east side.

Photo 14: Service Road and Cobbledick Road intersection, 20m from crossing along south road

approach, west side. Back lights obstructed by Warning System Housing Unit on south west quadrant. No stop bar present on Service Road at stop sign.



Photo 15: View of crossing at SSD of 110m for road speed of 50km/h on the south road approach. “X”

pavement markings are not present.

Photo 16: Completely faded “X” pavement marking located beyond 110m on the south road approach.


Photo 17: WA-18, WA-22, Advisory Speed Tab sign and “3 Tracks” sign placed on the same post

located beyond 110m on the south road approach. Sign is also located in a ditch and the WA-22 sign may not be visible from certain angles on the road. WA-18 sign does not show correct number of tracks.

Photo 18: Faded stop bars on the south road approach.



Photo 19: Faded stop bars on the north road approach.

Photo 20: Directional dividing line present and measured to be less than 30m due to close proximity of

the Service Road intersection on the south road approach.


Photo 21: View of crossing at SSD of 110m for road speed of 50km/h on the north road approach.

Photo 22: North road approach, “X” pavement marking at 180m from crossing and is faded.



Photo 23: North road approach, WA-18 sign placed within 10m of corresponding “X” pavement marking.

Sign is leaning, damaged and does not show correct number of tracks.

Photo 24: Modified WA-18 sign on Service Road located 168m from Cobbledick Road intersection. Sign

does not depict accurate track angle configuration and number of tracks.


Photo 25: “X” pavement markings on Service Road are heavily faded.

NOTE: All references to direction in this safety review are keyed to this diagram.

Sheet 2 SCENE SKETCH Active Crossings


Mile 287.26


8

5

°


Cobbledick R

oad

THE CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY

OF CLARINGTON - TRAIN WHISTLE CESSATION STUDY

Jan 2018SS-2

Scale

1:500

Cobbledick Road

(Mile 287.26, CN Kingston Subdivision)

Scene Sketch

#

Crossing Type

Flashing Lights,

Bells and Gates

Cobbledick R

oad

Service Road

Toronto

Ottawa

West approach

East approach

Maximum Railway Operating Speed, VT = mph = km/h

Daily Train Volume Freight trains/day:

Passenger trains/day:

Switching during dayime? Switching during nighttime?

Average Annual Daily Traffic, AADT = vpd Year of Count:

High seasonal fluctuation in volumes?

Pedestrian Volume = pedestrians/day

Cyclist Volume = cyclists/day

Is crossing on a School Bus Route?

Do Dangerous Goods Trucks use this roadway?

Regular use of crossing by persons with Assistive Devices?

Other special road users? Type: Daily Volume:

Forecasted AADT = Forecast Year:

Road Crossing Design Speed = km/h

Surrounding Land Use: Urban/rural?

Any schools, retirement homes, etc. nearby?

Notes:

T indicates information should be confirmed by field observation

1. Road Authority should provide plans if available.

2. Forecast AADT until next assessment if significant developments are expected or if a planned bypass may reduce volumes.

ObserveN/A

Road T 50

Observe Hydro field south of crossing. Rural

Road T N/A N/A

Road N/A N/A

Road T Not Observed

Road T Not Observed

Road N.M.

Road T Yes

Road Not Observed

Road N.M.

Rail TBD TBD

Road 826 TBD

Rail 100 161

Rail12

32

Sheet 3 GENERAL INFORMATION



GCS Section 10


Type:

Length, L = m

Stopping Sight Distance, SSD = m

Clearance Distance, cd = m

Vehicle Travel Distance, S = L + cd = m

Vehicle Departure Time, TD = J + T = sec

J = sec = driver's reaction time

T = (t x G) = sec = the time for the design vehicle to travel through S

t = sec = the time for the design vehicle to accelerate through S

G = = ratio of acceleration time on grade/grade adjustment factor

maximum approach grade within S = %

Do field acceleration times exceed TD?

TP = sec

VP = m/s (maximum 1.22 m/s)look-up 1.22

Pedestrian, Cyclist & Assistive Devices Departure Time, TP = cd/VP

calculate 15.7

observe N/A

Road Grade Effect:

Road 5.5

look-up 1.45 GDG T2.3.3.2

calculate 13.4

look-up 9.3 GDG Fig. 2.3.3.3


look-up 2 Sect. 10.3.2


look-up 110 Sect. 7.5

measure 19.1 Fig. 10-1

look-up 12.2 Sect. 10.3.1

Design Vehicle

Rail Standard Single Unit Buses (B-12) Sect. 10.3.1

Sheet 4 DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS GCS Section 10



GCS Section 11


"D" should not be less than 30m for either approach if train speed exceeds 15 mph.

"D" = m on N approach = m on S approach

Are there pedestrian crossings on either road approach that could cause vehicles to queue back

to the tracks?

Is "D" insufficient such that road vehicles might queue onto the tracks?

Is "D" insufficient such that road vehicles turning from a side street might not see warning

devices for the crossing?

Comments Following Site Visit:Property accesses on the road approach within 30m of the crossing. Cobbledick Rd is the major roadway

and has the right of way unless otherwise noted.

South Road Approach

-19.5m (east side)

-20m (Service Rd intersection is stop controlled with right of way to Cobbledick Rd.)

observeNo

observe

No

No

measure Fig. 11-1N/A 20

Sheet 5 LOCATION OF GRADE CROSSING GCS Section 11



GCS Section 5


Is the crossing smooth enough to allow road vehicles, pedestrians, cyclists and other road users

to cross at their normal speed without consequence? Comment below.

Grade Crossing Surface Material:

Approach Road Surface Type:

Approach Road Surface Condition:

Roadway Illumination?

Road Crossing Surface Width = m

Centre Lane/Median Width

= m

Travelled Way Width


Paved Shoulder Width


Surface Extension beyond Travel Lanes/Shoulder


Distance between Travel Lane/Shoulder and Sidewalk/Path/Trail


Sidewalk/Path/Trail Width


Surface Extension beyond Sidewalk/Path/Trail


Cross-Section:

Flangeway width = mm (min. = 65 mm; max. = 75 mm1 or 120 mm)

Flangeway depth = mm (min. = 50 mm; max. = 75 mm1 or no limit)

Field Side Gap width = mm (max. = 120 mm or 0 mm1)

Field Side Gap depth = mm (max. = no limit or 0 mm1)

Elevation of Top Rail above road surface = mm (max. = 13 mm1 or 25 mm)

Elevation of Top Rail below road surface = mm (min. = -7 mm1 or -25 mm)

1. Public sidewalks, paths or trails designated by the road authority for use of persons using assistive devices

Comments Following Site Visit:Shoulder on both sides of the north road approach varies. West side shoulder widens from 1.25m to 2m at

the start of Highway 401 overpass.

East side shoulder widens from 0.75m to 1.8m.

No shoulder on the south road approach.

Please see the following page for notes on the flangeway width, flangeway depth, field side gap width, field

side gap depth & elevation of the top of rail with respect to the crossing surface.







N/A N/A

N/A N/A

3.3

Notes 0

2.6 2.6

N/A N/A

observe

Asphalt

Fair

No

measure

11.8

Fig. 3-1

Fig. 5-1

N/A

3.3

observe Two crossings with rubber crossing panels


observe Sect. 5.1Fair

Sheet 6 GRADE CROSSING SURFACE GCS Section 3, 5



Barnarde

Snapshot

Barnarde

Rectangle

Are the horizontal and vertical alignments smooth and continuous throughout SSD?


Are the road lanes and shoulders at least the same width on the crossing as on the road approaches?


Within 8m % on N approach % on S approach (max. = 2%)

Between 8m to 18m % on N approach % on S approach (max. = 5%)

Road Classification

Allowable difference between roadway gradient and railway cross-slope = %

Road approach gradient at crossing: % on N approach % on S approach

Railway Cross Slope: %

Is the difference between the road approach gradient and the railway cross slope, or the railway

gradient and the road approach cross slope, in accordance with the design standards of the Geometric

Design Guide (Table 2.3.13.1)?


Are rail tracks super elevated?


Grade Crossing Angle = °

(70° min and 110° max without warning system; 30° min and 150° max with warning system)

Condition of Road Approaches: anything that might affect stopping or acceleration. Comment.

Is there any evidence that "low-bed" trucks have difficulty negotiating the crossing?

i.e. might they bottom-out or get stuck?

Comments Following Site Visit:Shoulder on the north road approach is not consistent along roadway.

Gradient of the south approach within 8m of the nearest rail is 5.5% which exceeds the GCS limit of 2%.

Gradient of the north approach within 8m of the nearest rail is 3.4% which exceeds the GCS limit of 2%.

Railway Cross Slope:

North Track: 1.8%,

Middle Track: 1.0%

South Track: 0.1%

The difference between the road approach gradient and the railway cross-slope is not in accordance with

6.2 of the GCS:

South Road Approach: difference = 5.4% (allowable difference 2% for roadway classified as Rural Local

Undivided).

North Road Approach: difference = 5.2% (allowable difference 2% for roadway classified as Rural Local

Undivided)

Road85

Sect. 6.5

observe

observeNot Observed

observeSect. 6.2

GDG T-2.3-13.1

Not Observed Not Observed

RailN/A N/A

look-up Rural Local Undivided Sect. 6.2

GDG T-2.3-13.1calculate 2

measure-3.4 5.5 Sect. 6.2

GDG T-2.3-13.1See notes below

measure

Road Approach Grades

Sect. 6.3-3.4 5.5

-3.2 2.0

observe Sect. 6.4No Yes

Grades:



Sheet 7 ROAD GEOMETRY GCS Section 6


GCS Section 7


Driver Eye Height = 1.05m passenger vehicles, pedestrians, cyclists & assistive devices

= 1.80m buses & single-unit trucks

= 2.10m large trucks & tractor-trailers

Target Height = 1.20m above rails

Type of Grade Crossing: Are gates present?

Is the crossing exempted from sightline requirements?

SSD minimum = m

SSD actual: N Approach m S Approach m

For Users Stopped at a Grade Crossing (See Fig 7-1(a))

DSTOPPED = 1.47VT x TSTOPPED where VT = railway design speed in mph (Sheet 4)

and TSTOPPED = departure times TD or TP (Sheet 4)

Is crossing exempted from DSTOPPED requirements?

Design Vehicle Departure Time (TD) = sec (from sheet 4)

Pedestrian, Cyclist & Assistive Device Departure Time (TP) = sec (from sheet 4)

DSTOPPED-D minimum = ft = m

DSTOPPED-P minimum = ft = m

DSTOPPED actual N Approach m to driver's left m to driver's right

S Approach m to driver's left m to driver's right

Are there any obstacles within the sight triangles that affect visibility? Comment.

Comments Following Site Visit:Crossing is equipped with flashing lights, bells and gates and is exempt from DSSD and DSTOPPED sightline

requirements.

Sight triangles obstructed by vegetation/brush along roadway and railway ROW.

Actual SSD is greater than 110m.

Visibility of the front light units on both road appraoches is clear.

measure Clear Clear

observe Yes

calculate 2301 701

measure Clear Clear

Sect. 7.2

Fig. 7-1

look-up Yes

look-up 15.4

look-up 15.7

calculate 2269 691

look-up 110

measure 110 110 Sect. 7.2

Warning: some formulae are based on Imperial units while others are Metric


look-up FLBG Yes

GCR Sect. 22look-up Yes

Sheet 8 SIGHTLINES GCS Section 7, 10


GCS Section 8


Railway Crossing Sign

Are signs present?


Are signs as shown in Figure 8-1(a)?


Number of Tracks Sign

Are signs present?


Are signs required?


Are signs as shown in Figure 8-1(b)?


Are signs installed on the supporting post of each railway crossing sign as shown in Figure 8-3(c)?

N Approach S Approachobserve Fig. 8-3

N/A N/A


look-up Sect 4.1.2Yes Yes

observe Fig. 8-1N/A N/A


observe Sect 4.1.2Yes Yes




Sect. 8.1

MUTCDC A2.2.7




GCS Section 8


Railway Crossing Ahead Sign (WA-18, 19 & 20)

Are signs present?


Are signs required?


Do signs have the appropriate orientation?


Distance to nearest rail:


Lateral Placement:


Height:


Advisory Speed Tab Sign (WA-7S)

Are signs present?


Are signs required?


Are signs mounted on the same post as the Railway Crossing Ahead Sign?


Posted speed limit?

N Approach S Approachobserve

N/A 20

Comments Following Site Visit:WA-18, "3 Tracks", Advisory speed tab sign and WA-22 sign are all placed on the same post.


observe MUTCDC A3.2.5N/A Yes

Sect. 8.2

MUTCDC 3.2.5

observeNo Yes

1.5 2.4 MUTCDC A1.7.2

Comments Following Site Visit:Railway Crossing Ahead Sign on the north road approach does not meet the following MUTCDC

recommended limits:

• Distance: 179.8m from the nearest rail, which exceeds the MUTCDC recommended limit of 150m.

• Does not show correct number of tracks on sign.

• Sign on the north road approach is damaged on the top and is leaning eastward


measure

179.8 150.2 MUTCDC A3.1.4

2 4.3 MUTCDC A1.7.2


observe MUTCDC Fig. C1-6Yes Yes


Sect. 8.2

MUTCDC 3.4.2

observeYes Yes



Emergency Notification Sign

Are signs present?


Are signs required?


Are signs oriented to face traffic approaching the grade crossing or parallel to the road?


Are signs legible to road vehicles?


What is the condition of the sign?


Pavement Markings

Are pavement markings consistent with those from the MUTCDC Manual?

Are there directional dividing lines for at least 30 m on both road approaches?

Are there lines to delineate sidewalks, paths and trails?

Additional signs installed in proximity to crossing:

South Road Approach

"3 Tracks" Sign: Height: 1.9m ; Offset: 4.3m; Location: 150.2m

Advisory speed tab Sign: Height: 1.5m; Offset: 4.3m; Location: 150.2m

WA-22 Sign: Height: 0.7m; Offset: 4.3m; Location: 150.2m

observe N/A

Comments Following Site Visit:-"X" pavement marking completely faded on south road approach.

- Stop bars faded on both road approaches.

General Comments Regarding Signs & Pavement Markings:

observe No MUTCDC Fig. C1-6

observe Yes MUTCDC C2.1

Comments Following Site Visit:Emergency Notification Sign is installed on the warning system housing unit in the southwest quadrant,

parallel to the roadway. Due to the location of the sign, the sign may not be visible to road users.

Emergency notification signs also placed on both signal masts within view of drivers stopped at crossing

which meets GCS requirements.



observeGood Good

look-up GCR Sect. 63Yes Yes


Sect. 8.5

observeYes Yes




- Directional dividing line does not continue south of Service Road intersection.

- Service Road:

o "X" pavement marking is fading

o WA-18 post is leaning and not perpendicular to road.

o WA-18 shows incorrect orientation, showing crossing at an angle to the road, however

crossing is perpendicular to the road.

o WA-18: Height: 2.3m; Offset: 1.5m; Location (from Cobbledick Road): 167.8

o "3 Tracks" sign also located on same post.

Barnarde

Rectangle

GCS Section 9


Warrants for a Warning System Without Gates

If any of A through E below are met, then a warning system without gates is required

A. AADT = vpd Daily Train Movements = trains per day

Cross-Product = (2,000 min.)

Warranted?

B. Is there a sidewalk, path or trail?

Railway Design Speed = mph

Warranted?

C. Are there two or more lines of railway where trains may pass each other?


Warranted?

D. Is D < 30 m to a Stop Sign at an intersection?


Warranted?

E. Is D < 60 m to a signalized intersection?


Warranted?

Warrants for a Warning System With Gates

If a warning system is warranted, and any of F through J are met, then gates are also required

F. Cross-Product = (50,000 min.)

Warranted?

G. Are there two or more lines of railway where trains may pass each other?

Warranted?

H. Is the railway design speed > 50 mph?

Warranted?

I. Is D < 30 m to a Stop Sign at an intersection?

Warranted?

J. Is D < 60 m to a signalized intersection?

Warranted?look-up

No

Sect. 9.2.1.eNo


look-upYes

Sect. 9.2.1.cYes

look-upYes

Sect. 9.2.1.dYes

look-up36,344

Sect. 9.2.1.aNo

RailYes

Sect. 9.2.1.bYes

look-up

No

Sect. 9.1.d.iiiYes

No

Sect. 9.2

Rail

Yes

Sect. 9.1.d.iYes

Yes

look-up

Yes

Sect. 9.1.d.iiYes

Yes

Yes

look-up

No

Sect. 9.1.b,c100

Yes


Sect. 9.1

look-up

826 44.00

Sect. 9.1.a36,344

Sheet 12 GRADE CROSSING WARNING SYSTEM WARRANTS GCS Section 9


Warning Systems Clearance Distance from Railway

Min. 3.66 m (12 ft) for signal mast or 3.05 m (10 ft) for end of gate arm; from centreline of track


Warning System Clearance Distance from Roadway

Min. 625 mm from curb; or 1.875 m from travelled way and 625 mm from shoulder


Distance between top of foundation and surrounding ground level (max. 100 mm (4 in))

N Approach mm S Approach mm

Is the slope of surrounding ground from foundation towards the travelled way less than 25% (4:1)?


Light units: N Approach S Approach

Condition:

Bells: N Approach S Approach

Condition:

Gates: N Approach S Approach

Condition:

Cantilever Lights: N Approach S Approach

Condition:

If there is only one sidewalk, is a bell located on the adjacent assembly?

Design Approach Warning Time: W Approach sec E Approach sec

Should be greatest of:

a) 20s, unless cd > 11 m, increase the 20s by one second for each additional 3 m sec

b) TD sec

c) TP sec

d) TG + gate arm descent time + 5s sec

e) Minimum warning time required for traffic signal pre-emption sec

f) TSSD sec

Actual Approach Warning Time: W Approach sec E Approach sec

Comments Following Site Visit:TBD = To be determined, 'Slope of ground from foundation towards the travelled way was unable to be

determined due to snow conditions on ground.

'N.M = Not measured during site visit. C.N to provide information.

Bell is present, however no sidewalk is present.

The clearance distance from the edge of the travelled way is 0.5m for the south signal mast, which is less

than the GCS limit of 1.875m for roadways without a curb.

The distance between the top of the foundation and the surrounding ground surface exceeds the GCS

maximum limit of 100mm for both signal masts.

look-up 10

Rail N/A N/A Sect. 16.2

15

look-up 16

look-up 28

look-up N/A

observe N/A Sect. 15.1.2

Rail 28 28

Sect. 16.1.1

look-up 23

look-up

observeYes Yes

Sect. 15.2Good

observeNo No

Sect. 13.3

observeYes Yes

Sect. 13, 14Good

observeYes Yes

Sect. 15.1Good

measure Sect. 12.1.c300 190

measure Sect. 12.1.cTBD TBD

observeAREMA C&S Manual

Part 3.1.36 C.6.4.4 4.4

measure Sect. 12.1.a,b

1.9 0.5

Sheet 13 GRADE CROSSING WARNING SYSTEMS GCS Section 12-16



GCS Section 12


Front and Back Lights for Vehicles

Are signal assemblies as shown in Figure 12-1?

Alignment Height: N Approach m S Approach m

Are primary light units visible for at least the minimum SSD?


Are additional light units required to cover intermediate areas of the road approaches?


Are back light units visible by stopped vehicles at least 15 m?


Are lights installed exclusively for sidewalks, paths or trails visible for at least 30 m?


Additional Lights for Sidewalks, Paths, Trails, etc.

Distance from path centreline to signal mast (max 3.6m)


Are separate flashing light units required for pedestrians?


Cantilever Light Units

Are cantilevers as shown in Figure 12-3?

Distance from nearest rail: N Approach m S Approach m

Distance from travelled way: N Approach m S Approach m

Height: N Approach m S Approach m

DR: N Approach m S Approach m

DL: N Approach m S Approach m

Are Cantilever lights required?

N Approach S Approachlook-up Sect. 13.3.1

No No

Comments Following Site Visit:Front light units are aligned to cover Service Road.

measure N/A N/A Fig. 13-1(a),(b)

measure N/A N/A Fig. 13-1(b)

measure N/A N/A

measure N/A N/A Fig 13-1

observe N/A Sect. 12.1

measure N/A N/A

calculate Fig. 13-2N/A N/A

look-up Sect. 13.4.1No No

observe Sect. 14.6.1N/A N/A

observe Sect. 14.4.1No No


measure 2.7 2.7 Fig. 12-1

observe Sect. 14.3.1.aYes Yes


observe Yes Sect. 12.1

Sheet 14 FLASHING LIGHT UNITS GCS Section 13, 14


GCS Section 12


Are gates as shown in Figure 12-2?

Gate Arm Clearance Time for Vehicles

TG = greater of TG,SSD or TG,STOP

TG,SSD = Gate Arm Clearance Distance from SSD / Road Speed in m/s

TG,SSD = (SSD + 2m + L) / 0.278V

TG,SSD = sec

TG,STOP = Gate Arm Clearance from Stop

TG,STOP = J + (tG x G) tG = sec

TG,STOP = sec

TG = sec

Gate arm delay: N Approach sec S Approach sec

Are strips on the gate arm 406 mm (16 in.) wide and aligned vertically?


Distance between the end of the gate arm and the edge of the travelled way


Gate arm descent time: sec Gate arm ascent time: sec

Comments Following Site Visit:N.M = Not Meadured during site visit. C.N to provide information.

measure Sect. 12.1.eN.M N.M

measure 12.3 6.2 Sect. 15.2.2

measure N.M N.M Sect. 15.2.3

measure Sect. 12.1.d.iYes Yes

calculate Sect. 10.4.18.9

6.15

10.9

10.9


observe TBD Sect. 12.1

Sheet 15 GATES FOR GRADE CROSSING WARNING SYSTEMS GCS Section 10, 12, 15


Warrants for a Prepare to Stop at Railway Crossing Sign

If any of A through C below are met, then a Prepare to Stop at Railway Crossing sign is required

A. Is the roadway classified as an expressway?

B. Is at least one set of front lights on the warning system not clearly visible within the stopping

sight distance of at least one of the lanes of the road approach?

C. Do weather conditions at the grade crossing repeatedly obscure the visibility of the warning

system?

Is a Prepare to Stop at Railway Crossing Sign required?

If any of D through E below are met, then a Prepare to Stop at Railway Crossing sign may be required

D. Is the speed limit of the travelled way greater than 90 km/h?

E. Is the crossing at the bottom of a hill or downgrade of considerable length?

Calculated Distance of Light Units

(See Advance Warning Flashers: Guidelines for Application and Installation (TAC 2005))

D = (Vtpr / 3.6) + (V2 / [25.92 x (a + Gg)])

V = km/h (posted speed limit

tpr = s (perception/reaction time)

a = m/s2

(deceleration rate; typically 2.6m/s2)

GN = m/100m (grade on approach)

GS = m/100m (grade on approach)

g = m/s2

(gravitational acceleration; 9.81m/s2)

Recommended minimum Advance Warning Flasher Distance from Railway


Actual Advance Warning Flasher Distance from Railway


Considering maximum prevailing speeds, geoemetry and traffic composition, check:

Does the sign flash:

a) in advance of the activation of light units of the warning system

b) during the time of operation of the light units of the warning system


Does the advance activation time provide sufficient time for a vehicle to:

a) clear the grade crossing before the arrival of railway equipment at the crossing surface (FLB)

b) clear the grade crossing before gate arms start to descend (FLBG)


observe Sect. 18.2

N/A N/A


observe Sect. 18.1

N/A N/A

70.0 62.3

measureN/A N/A

look-up -3.2

look-up 2.0

look-up 9.81

observe No MUTCDC A3.6.6

Advance Warning

Flashers: Guidelines for

Application and

Installation (TAC 2005)

look-up 50

look-up 2

look-up 2.6

look-up No GCR Sect. 67

look-up No MUTCDC A3.6.6

observe GCR Sect. 67(b)No

observe GCR Sect. 67(c)No


Sect. 18

MUTCDC A3.6.6

look-up No GCR Sect. 67(a)

Sheet 16 PREPARE TO STOP AT RAILWAY CROSSING SIGN GCS Section 18


Warrants for an Interconnected Traffic Signal

Is the railway design speed greater than 15 mph?

Is there less than 30m between the nearest rail of a grade crossing and the travelled way of an

intersection with traffic signals?

Is an Interconnected Traffic Signal required?

Are adjacent traffic signals interconnected with a grade crossing warning system?

note: provide timing plan if interconnected

Date of last pre-emption check?

Field checks:

Does interconnection provide adequate time to clear traffic from the grade crossing before the

arrival of railway equipment?

Does interconnection prohibit road traffic from moving from the street intersection towards the

grade crossing

Are there known queuing issues at the tracks?

Are pedestrians accomodated during the pre-emption?

Have longer/slower vehicles been considered?

Are supplemental signs needed for motorists?


observe N/A

observe N/A

observe N/A

observe N/A

observe Sect. 19.3.aN/A

observe Sect. 19.3.bN/A

Road N/A

Rail

Road N/A

Sect. 19

look-up Yes

Sect. 19.1measureNo

look-up No

Sheet 17 INTERCONNECTION OF TRAFFIC SIGNALS GCS Section 19



GCS Appendix D


Is train whistling prohibited at this crossing?

24 hours per day?

Is there evidence of routine unauthorized access (trespassing) on the rail line in the area of the

crossing? Comment below.

What is the required type of warning system as per Table D-1?

Are the requirements of Table D-1 met?observe Yes Appendix D

Comments Following Site Visit:No evidence of trespassing observed during the site visit on November 21 2017

observeNo

look-up FLBG Appendix D


RailNo

N/A

Sheet 18 WHISTLE CESSATION GCS Appendix D


Human Factors

• Control device visibility / background visual clutter

• Driver workload through this area (i.e., are there numerous factors that simultaneously require the driver's attention, such as

traffic lights, pedestrian activity, merging/entering traffic, commercial signing, etc.).

• Driver expectancy of the environment (i.e., are the control measures in keeping with the design levels of the road system and

adjacent environment).

• Need for positive guidance.

• Conflicts between road and railway signs and signals.

Environmental Factors

• Extreme weather conditions.

• Lighting issues (night, dawn/dusk, tunnels, adjacent facilities, headlight or sunlight glare, etc.).

• Landscaping or vegetation.

• Integration with surrounding land uses (e.g., parked vehicles blocking sightlines, merging traffic lanes, etc.).

All Road Users

• Have needs of the following been met:

- pedestrians (including strollers, baby carriages, and blind persons)

- children

- elderly

- bicyclists

- motorcyclists

- over-sized trucks

- buses

- recreational vehicles

- wheelchairs, scooters, walkers, etc.

- rollerblades

Additional Prompt Lists



Suggested Action From Study Estimated Cost

Replace crossing planks / reconstruct crossing surface (2 Sets of Tracks) 70,000.00$ Road resurfacing 46,200.00$ Signage improvements 3,500.00$ Pavement Markings 4,200.00$ Grade crossing warning system 4,200.00$ Fencing Along Rail Corridor *** 120,000.00$

Total Estimated Initial Improvement Cost 248,100.00$ Engineering Costs (Detailed Design and Contract Administration @ 15% 37,200.00$

Contingencies @ 10% 25,800.00$ 123,900.00-$

6,000.00$ 1,250.00$ 5,000.00$

25,928.50$ Net Cost For Initial Actions 225,378.50$

Rounded Total 225,000.00$ Cobbledick Road

Suggested Action From Study Estimated Cost

Replace crossing planks / reconstruct crossing surface (3 Sets of Tracks) 105,000.00$ Repaving of Approaches and Areas between Tracks 15,000.00$ Monitor and trim vegetation to improve visibility of warning system 1,400.00$ Signage improvements 3,500.00$ Pavement Markings 5,250.00$ Grade crossing warning system 4,200.00$ Fencing Along Rail Corridor *** -$

Total Estimated Initial Improvement Cost 134,350.00$ Engineering Costs (Detailed Design and Contract Administration @ 15% 20,200.00$

Contingencies @ 10% 14,400.00$ Reassessment of Level Crossing Conditions for Whistle Cessation after Improvements 6,000.00$

Flagging for Reassessment of Level Crossing Conditions for Whistle Cessation 1,250.00$ 5,000.00$

23,556.00$ Net Cost For Initial Actions 204,756.00$

Rounded Total 205,000.00$ Grand Total Both Level Crossings for Initial Actions for Whistle Cessation 430,000.00$

CNR Peer Review of Whistle Cessation Report and Recommendations

CNR Peer Review of Whistle Cessation Report and RecommendationsHST @13%

*** Note that although rail corridor trespass has not been identified as an issue during this initial review the development that is proposed in the area may change this condition at which time fencing may be required to remedy and future trespass issues.

HST @13%

Summary of Recommendations For Initial Action by Road Authority to Move Forward with Pursuit of Whistle Cessation

Bennett Road

CREDIT - Works to be completed in support of the Lakebreeze SubdivisionReassessment of Level Crossing Conditions for Whistle Cessation after Improvements

Flagging for Reassessment of Level Crossing Conditions for Whistle Cessation

Attachment 2 to Report EGD-004-18

Documents

Engineering Services Report › weblink › 0 › edoc › 124077 › EGD...Consulting/Professional Fees reserve account number 100-00-000-00000-2926, to Canadian National Railway